18.3: The History of American Foreign Policy

18.3.1: Isolationism

Learning Objective

Explain the historical reasons for American isolationism in foreign affairs

Key Points

• President George Washington established non-interventionism in his farewell address, and this policy was continued by Thomas Jefferson.
• The United States policy of non-intervention was maintained throughout most of the nineteenth century. The first significant foreign intervention by the United States was the Spanish-American War, which saw it occupy and control the Philippines.
• In the wake of the First World War, the non-interventionist tendencies of U.S. foreign policy were in full force. First, the United States Congress rejected President Woodrow Wilson’s most cherished condition of the Treaty of Versailles, the League of Nations.
• The near total humiliation of Germany in the wake of World War I, laid the groundwork for a pride-hungry German people to embrace Adolf Hitler’s rise to power. Non-intervention eventually contributed to Hitler’s rise to power in the 1930s.

Key Terms

isolationism

The policy or doctrine of isolating one’s country from the affairs of other nations by declining to enter into alliances, foreign economic commitments, foreign trade, international agreements, etc..

brainchild

A creation, original idea, or innovation, usually used to indicate the originators

non-interventionism

Non-interventionism, the diplomatic policy whereby a nation seeks to avoid alliances with other nations in order to avoid being drawn into wars not related to direct territorial self-defense, has had a long history in the United States.

Background

For the first 200 years of United States history, the national policy was isolationism and non-interventionism. George Washington’s farewell address is often cited as laying the foundation for a tradition of American non-interventionism: “The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.”

No Entangling Alliances in the Nineteenth Century

President Thomas Jefferson extended Washington’s ideas in his March 4, 1801 inaugural address: “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none. ” Jefferson’s phrase “entangling alliances” is, incidentally, sometimes incorrectly attributed to Washington.

Non-interventionism continued throughout the nineteeth century. After Tsar Alexander II put down the 1863 January Uprising in Poland, French Emperor Napoleon III asked the United States to “join in a protest to the Tsar. ” Secretary of State William H Seward declined, “defending ‘our policy of non-intervention — straight, absolute, and peculiar as it may seem to other nations,'” and insisted that “the American people must be content to recommend the cause of human progress by the wisdom with which they should exercise the powers of self-government, forbearing at all times, and in every way, from foreign alliances, intervention, and interference. “

The United States’ policy of non-intervention was maintained throughout most of the nineteenth century. The first significant foreign intervention by the United States was the Spanish-American War, which saw the United States occupy and control the Philipines.

Twentieth Century Non-intervention

Theodore Roosevelt’s administration is credited with inciting the Panamanian Revolt against Colombia in order to secure construction rights for the Panama Canal, begun in 1904. President Woodrow Wilson, after winning re-election with the slogan, “He kept us out of war,” was nonetheless compelled to declare war on Germany and so involve the nation in World War I when the Zimmerman Telegram was discovered. Yet non-interventionist sentiment remained; the U.S. Congress refused to endorse the Treaty of Versailles or the League of Nations.

Non-Interventionism between the World Wars

In the wake of the First World War, the non-interventionist tendencies of U.S. foreign policy were in full force . First, the United States Congress rejected president Woodrow Wilson’s most cherished condition of the Treaty of Versailles, the League of Nations. Many Americans felt that they did not need the rest of the world, and that they were fine making decisions concerning peace on their own. Even though “anti-League” was the policy of the nation, private citizens and lower diplomats either supported or observed the League of Nations. This quasi-isolationism shows that the United States was interested in foreign affairs but was afraid that by pledging full support for the League, it would lose the ability to act on foreign policy as it pleased.

Wake Up America!

At the dawn of WWI, posters like this asked America to abandon its isolationist policies.

Although the United States was unwilling to commit to the League of Nations, they were willing to engage in foreign affairs on their own terms. In August 1928, 15 nations signed the Kellogg-Briand Pact, brainchild of American Secretary of State Frank Kellogg and French Foreign Minister Aristride Briand. This pact that was said to have outlawed war and showed the United States commitment to international peace had its semantic flaws. For example, it did not hold the United States to the conditions of any existing treaties, it still allowed European nations the right to self-defense, and stated that if one nation broke the pact, it would be up to the other signatories to enforce it. The Kellogg-Briand Pact was more of a sign of good intentions on the part of the United States, rather than a legitimate step towards the sustenance of world peace.

Non-interventionism took a new turn after the Crash of 1929. With the economic hysteria, the United States began to focus solely on fixing its economy within its borders and ignored the outside world. As the world’s democratic powers were busy fixing their economies within their borders, the fascist powers of Europe and Asia moved their armies into a position to start World War II. With military victory came the spoils of war –a very draconian pummeling of Germany into submission, via the Treaty of Versailles. This near-total humiliation of Germany in the wake of World War I, as the treaty placed sole blame for the war on the nation, laid the groundwork for a pride-hungry German people to embrace Adolf Hitler’s rise to power.

18.3.2: World War I and the League of Nations

Learning Objective

Explain the historical rise and fall of the League of Nations after World War I

Key Points

• The League of Nations was suggested in Wilson’s 14 points.
• The League of Nations’ functions included arbitration and peace-keeping. However, it did not have an army to enforce power.
• The League of Nations was the precursor to the United Nations.

Key Terms

arbitration

A process through which two or more parties use an arbitrator or arbiter (an impartial third party) in order to resolve a dispute.

World Trade Organization

an international organization designed by its founders to supervise and liberalize international trade

disarmament

The reduction or the abolition of the military forces and armaments of a nation, and of its capability to wage war

intergovernmental

Of, pertaining to, or involving two or more governments

An Early Attempt at International Organization

The League of Nations was an intergovernmental organization founded as a result of the Paris Peace Talks that ended the First World War. The form and ideals were drawn to some extent from US President Woodrow Wilson’s 14 Points. The League was the first permanent international organization whose principal mission was to maintain world peace. Its primary goals, as stated in its Covenant, included preventing wars through collective security and disarmament, and settling international disputes through negotiation and arbitration. Other issues in this and related treaties included labor conditions, just treatment of native inhabitants, human and drug trafficking, arms trade, global health, prisoners of war, and protection of minorities in Europe. At the height of its development, from 28 September 1934 to 23 February 1935, it had 58 member nations.

Map of League of Nations

The countries on the map represent those that have been involved with the League of Nations.

A Lack of Leverage

The diplomatic philosophy behind the League represented a fundamental shift from the preceding hundred years. The League lacked its own armed force, and depended on the Great powers to enforce its resolutions, keep to its economic sanctions, or provide an army when needed. However, the Great Powers were often reluctant to do so. Sanctions could hurt League members, so they were reluctant to comply with them.

Failure of the League

After a number of notable successes and some early failures in the 1920s, the League ultimately proved incapable of preventing aggression by the Axis powers. In the 1930s, Germany withdrew from the League, as did Japan, Italy, Spain, and others. The onset of World War II showed that the League had failed its primary purpose, which was to prevent any future world war. The United Nations (UN) replaced it after the end of the war and inherited a number of agencies and organizations founded by the League.

18.3.3: World War II

Learning Objective

Compare and contrast the arguments made by interventionists and non-interventionists with respect to American involvement in World War II

Key Points

• Fascism was becoming a growing fear in the United States, and after Germany invaded Poland, many wondered if the US should intervene.
• Many famous public figures called for isolationism, such as professors and even Charles Lindburg.
• The Lend Lease program was a way to ease into interventionism, though the US stayed out militarily.

Key Term

Neutrality Act

The Neutrality Acts were passed by the United State Congress in the 1930’s and sought to ensure that the US would not become entangled again in foreign conflicts.

As Europe moved closer and closer to war in the late 1930s, the United States Congress was doing everything it could to prevent it. Between 1936 and 1937, much to the dismay of the pro-British President Roosevelt, Congress passed the Neutrality Acts. In the final Neutrality Act, Americans could not sail on ships flying the flag of a belligerent nation or trade arms with warring nations, potential causes for U.S. entry into war.

On September 1, 1939, Germany invaded Poland, and Britain and France subsequently declared war on Germany, marking the start of World War II . In an address to the American people two days later, President Roosevelt assured the nation that he would do all he could to keep them out of war. However, he also said: “When peace has been broken anywhere, the peace of all countries everywhere is in danger. “

germany invades poland

Germany invading Poland caused the United States to reconsider intervening.

The war in Europe split the American people into two distinct groups: non-interventionists and interventionists. The basic principle of the interventionist argument was fear of German invasion. By the summer of 1940, France had fallen to the Germans, and Britain was the only democratic stronghold between Germany and the United States. Interventionists were afraid of a world after this war, a world where they would have to coexist with the fascist power of Europe. In a 1940 speech, Roosevelt argued, “Some, indeed, still hold to the now somewhat obvious delusion that we … can safely permit the United States to become a lone island … in a world dominated by the philosophy of force. ” A national survey found that in the summer of 1940, 67% of Americans believed that a German-Italian victory would endanger the United States, that if such an event occurred 88% supported “arm[ing] to the teeth at any expense to be prepared for any trouble”, and that 71% favored “the immediate adoption of compulsory military training for all young men.”

Ultimately, the rift between the ideals of the United States and the goals of the fascist powers is what was at the core of the interventionist argument. “How could we sit back as spectators of a war against ourselves? ” writer Archibald MacLeish questioned. The reason why interventionists said we could not coexist with the fascist powers was not due to economic pressures or deficiencies in our armed forces, but rather because it was the goal of fascist leaders to destroy the American ideology of democracy. In an address to the American people on December 29, 1940, President Roosevelt said, “…the Axis not merely admits but proclaims that there can be no ultimate peace between their philosophy of government and our philosophy of government.”

However, there were still many who held on to the age-old tenets of non-interventionism. Although a minority, they were well organized, and had a powerful presence in Congress. Non-interventionists rooted a significant portion of their arguments in historical precedent, citing events such as Washington’s farewell address and the failure of World War I. In 1941, the actions of the Roosevelt administration made it clearer and clearer that the United States was on its way to war. This policy shift, driven by the President, came in two phases. The first came in 1939 with the passage of the Fourth Neutrality Act, which permitted the United States to trade arms with belligerent nations, as long as these nations came to America to retrieve the arms and paid for them in cash. This policy was quickly dubbed “Cash and Carry. ” The second phase was the Lend-Lease Act of early 1941. This act allowed the President “to lend, lease, sell, or barter arms, ammunition, food, or any ‘defense article’ or any ‘defense information’ to ‘the government of any country whose defense the President deems vital to the defense of the United States.’ He used these two programs to side economically with the British and the French in their fight against the Nazis.

On December 7, 1941, Japan attacked the American fleet at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. The attack was intended as a preventive action in order to keep the U.S. Pacific Fleet from interfering with military actions the Empire of Japan was planning in Southeast Asia against overseas territories of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and the United States. The following day, the United States declared war on Japan. Domestic support for non-interventionism disappeared. Clandestine support of Britain was replaced by active alliance. Subsequent operations by the U.S. prompted Germany and Italy to declare war on the U.S. on December 11, which was reciprocated by the U.S. the same day.

During the final stages of World War II in 1945, the United States conducted atomic bombings of the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. These two events represent the only use of nuclear weapons in war to date.

18.3.4: Interventionism

Learning Objective

Define interventionism and its relation to American foreign policy

Key Points

• In the period between World War I and World War II, the US’s foreign policy was characterized by isolationism, which meant it preferred to be isolated from the affairs of other countries.
• The ideological goals of the fascist powers in Europe during World War II and the growing aggression of Germany led many Americans to fear for the security of their nation, and thus call for an end to the US policy of isolationism.
• In the early 1940s, US policies such as the Cash and Carry Program and the Lend-Lease Act provided assistance to the Allied Powers in their fight against Germany. This growing involvement by the US marked a move away from isolationist tendencies towards interventionism.
• After World War II, the US became fully interventionist. US interventionism was motivated primarily by the goal of containing the influence of communism, and essentially meant the US was now a leader in global security, economic, and social issues.

Key Terms

interventionism

The political practice of intervening in a sovereign state’s affairs.

isolationism

The policy or doctrine of isolating one’s country from the affairs of other nations by declining to enter into alliances, foreign economic commitments, foreign trade, international agreements, etc..

Abandoning Isolationism

As the world was quickly drawn into WWII, the United States’ isolationist policies were replaced by more interventionism. In part, this foreign policy shift sprung from Euro-American relations and public fear.

On September 1, 1939, Germany invaded Poland; Britain and France subsequently declared war on Germany, marking the start of World War II. In an address to the American People two days later, President Roosevelt assured the nation that he would do all he could to keep them out of war. However, even though he was intent on neutrality as the official policy of the United States, he still echoed the dangers of staying out of this war. He also cautioned the American people to not let their wish to avoid war at all costs supersede the security of the nation.

The war in Europe split the American people into two distinct groups: non-interventionists and interventionists. The two sides argued over America’s involvement in this Second World War. The basic principle of the interventionist argument was fear of German invasion. By the summer of 1940, France had fallen to the Germans, and Britain was the only democratic stronghold between Germany and the United States. Interventionists feared that if Britain fell, their security as a nation would shrink immediately. A national survey found that in the summer of 1940, 67% of Americans believed that a German-Italian victory would endanger the United States, that if such an event occurred 88% supported “arm[ing] to the teeth at any expense to be prepared for any trouble”, and that 71% favored “the immediate adoption of compulsory military training for all young men”.

Ultimately, the ideological rift between the ideals of the United States and the goals of the fascist powers is what made the core of the interventionist argument.

Moving Towards War

As 1940 became 1941, the actions of the Roosevelt administration made it more and more clear that the United States was on a course to war. This policy shift, driven by the President, came in two phases. The first came in 1939 with the passage of the Fourth Neutrality Act, which permitted the United States to trade arms with belligerent nations, as long as these nations came to America to retrieve the arms, and pay for them in cash. This policy was quickly dubbed ‘Cash and Carry.’ The second phase was the Lend-Lease Act of early 1941 . This act allowed the President “to lend, lease, sell, or barter arms, ammunition, food, or any ‘defense article’ or any ‘defense information’ to ‘the government of any country whose defense the President deems vital to the defense of the United States.’ He used these two programs to side economically with the British and the French in their fight against the Nazis.

President Roosevelt signing the Lend-Lease Act

The Lend Lease Act allowed the United States to tip-toe from isolationism while still remaining militarily neutral.

Policies of Interventionism

After WWII, the United States took a policy of interventionism in order to contain communist influence abroad. Such forms of interventionism included giving aid to European nations to rebuild , having an active role in the UN, NATO, and police actions around the world, and involving the CIA in several coup take overs in Latin America and the Middle East. The US was not merely non-isolationist (i.e. the US was not merely abandoning policies of isolationism), but actively intervening and leading world affairs.

Marshall Plan and US Interventionism

After WWII, the US’s foreign policy was characterized by interventionism. For example, immediately after the end of the war, the US supplied Europe with monetary aid in hopes of combating the influence of communism in a vulnerable, war-weakened Europe. This label was posted on Marshall Aid packages.

18.3.5: The Cold War and Containment

Learning Objective

Discuss the doctrine of Containment and its role during the Cold War

Key Points

• Containment was suggested by diplomat George Kennan who eagerly suggested the United States stifle communist influence in Eastern Europe and Asia.
• One of the ways to accomplish this was by establishing NATO so the Western European nations had a defense against communist influence.
• After Vietnam and détente, President Jimmy Carter focused less on containment and more on fighting the Cold War by promoting human rights in hot spot countries.

Key Terms

deterrence

Action taken by states or alliances of nations against equally powerful alliances to prevent hostile action

rollback

A withdrawal of military forces.

The Cold War and Containment

Containment was a United States policy using numerous strategies to prevent the spread of communism abroad. A component of the Cold War, this policy was a response to a series of moves by the Soviet Union to enlarge its communist sphere of influence in Eastern Europe, China, Korea, and Vietnam. It represented a middle-ground position between détente and rollback.

The basis of the doctrine was articulated in a 1946 cable by United States diplomat, George F. Kennan (below). As a description of United States foreign policy, the word originated in a report Kennan submitted to the U.S. defense secretary in 1947—a report that was later used in a magazine article.

George F. Kennan

George F. Kennan was the diplomat behind the doctrine of containment.

The word containment is associated most strongly with the policies of United States President Harry Truman (1945–53), including the establishment of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a mutual defense pact. Although President Dwight Eisenhower (1953–61) toyed with the rival doctrine of rollback, he refused to intervene in the Hungarian Uprising of 1956. President Lyndon Johnson (1963–69) cited containment as a justification for his policies in Vietnam. President Richard Nixon (1969–74), working with his top advisor Henry Kissinger, rejected containment in favor of friendly relations with the Soviet Union and China; this détente, or relaxation of tensions, involved expanded trade and cultural contacts.

President Jimmy Carter (1976–81) emphasized human rights rather than anti-communism, but dropped détente and returned to containment when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979. President Ronald Reagan (1981–89), denouncing the Soviet state as an “evil empire”, escalated the Cold War and promoted rollback in Nicaragua and Afghanistan. Central programs begun under containment, including NATO and nuclear deterrence, remained in effect even after the end of the war.

18.3.6: Détente and Human Rights

Learning Objective

Explain the significance of the Helsinki Accords for the history of human rights in the 20th century and define the doctrine of Détente and its use by the United States during the Cold War

Key Points

• Détente was an effort by the super powers to ease tensions in the Cold War.
• The Nixon and Brezhnev administrations led the way with détente, talking about world issues and signing treaties such as SALT I and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.
• The Carter administration ushered in a human rights component to détente, criticizing the USSR’s poor record of human rights. The USSR countered by criticizing the US for its own human rights record, and for interfering in USSR domestic affairs.
• During the Carter administration, the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe created the Helsinki Accords, which addressed human rights in the USSR.
• Détente ended in 1980 with Soviet interference in Afghanistan, the US boycott of the 1980 Moscow Olympics, and Reagan’s election.

Key Terms

Warsaw Pact

A pact (long-term alliance treaty) signed on May 14, 1955 by the Soviet Union and its Communist military allies in Europe.

Détente

French for “relaxation,” détente is the easing of tense relations, particularly in a political situation. The term is often used in reference to the general easing of geo-political tensions between the Soviet Union and the US, which began in 1971 and ended in 1980.

Helsinki Accords

A declaration in an attempt to improve relations between the Communist bloc and the West. Developed in Europe, the Helsinki Accords called for human rights improvements in the USSR.

Détente

Détente, French for “relaxation”, is an international theory that refers to the easing of strained relations, especially in a political situation. The term is often used in reference to the general easing of relations between the Soviet Union and the United States in 1971, a thawing at a period roughly in the middle of the Cold War.

Treaties Toward Peace

The most important treaties of détente were developed when the Nixon Administration came into office in 1969. The Political Consultative Committee of the Warsaw Pact sent an offer to the West, urging to hold a summit on “security and cooperation in Europe”. The West agreed and talks began towards actual limits to the nuclear capabilities of the two superpowers. This ultimately led to the signing of the treaty in 1972. This treaty limited each power’s nuclear arsenals, though it was quickly rendered out-of-date as a result of the development of a new type of warhead. In the same year that SALT I was signed, the Biological Weapons Convention and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty were also concluded.

A follow up treaty, SALT II was discussed but was never ratified by the United States. There is debate among historians as to how successful the détente period was in achieving peace. The two superpowers agreed to install a direct hotline between Washington DC and Moscow, the so-called “red telephone,” enabling both countries to quickly interact with each other in a time of urgency. The SALT II pact of the late 1970s built on the work of the SALT I talks, ensuring further reduction in arms by the Soviets and by the US .

Nixon and Brezhnev

President Nixon and Premier Brezhnev lead in the high period of détente, signing treaties such as SALT I and the Helsinki Accords.

The Helsinki Accords and Human Rights in the USSR

The Helsinki Accords, in which the Soviets promised to grant free elections in Europe, has been seen as a major concession to ensure peace by the Soviets. The Helsinki Accord were developed by the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, a wide ranging series of agreements on economic, political, and human rights issues. The CSCE was initiated by the USSR, involving 35 states throughout Europe.

Among other issues, one of the most prevalent and discussed after the conference was the human rights violations in the Soviet Union. The Soviet Constitution directly violated the declaration of Human Rights from the United Nations, and this issue became a prominent point of dissonance between the United States and the Soviet Union.

Because the Carter administration had been supporting human rights groups inside the Soviet Union, Leonid Brezhnev accused the administration of interference in other countries’ internal affairs. This prompted intense discussion of whether or not other nations may interfere if basic human rights are being violated, such as freedom of speech and religion. The basic differences between the philosophies of a democracy and a single-party state did not allow for reconciliation of this issue. Furthermore, the Soviet Union proceeded to defend their internal policies on human rights by attacking American support of countries like South Africa and Chile, which were known to violate many of the same human rights issues.

Détente ended after the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, which led to America’s boycott in the 1980s Olympics in Moscow . Ronald Reagan’s election in 1980, based on an anti-détente campaign, marked the close of détente and a return to Cold War tension.

1980 Moscow Olympics

After the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, many countries boycotted the 1980 Olympic Games, held in Moscow. This photograph depicts Olympic runners in the 1980 games in front of Saint Basil’s Cathedral in Moscow.

18.3.7: Foreign Policy After the Cold War

Learning Objective

Explain the origins and elements of the New World Order after the end of the Cold War

Key Points

• The post-Cold War era saw the United States as the sole leader of the world affairs.
• The Cold War set the standard for military-industrial complexes which, while weaker than during the Cold War, is a legacy that continues to exist.
• The new world order as theorized between Bush and Gorbachev saw optimism and democratization for countries.

Key Terms

military-industrial complex

The armed forces of a nation together with the industries that supply their weapons and materiel.

new world order

The term new world order has been used to refer to any new period of history evidencing a dramatic change in world political thought and the balance of power. Despite various interpretations of this term, it is primarily associated with the ideological notion of global governance only in the sense of new collective efforts to identify, understand, or address worldwide problems that go beyond the capacity of individual nation-states to solve. The most widely discussed application of the phrase in recent times came at the end of the Cold War.

War on Terror

The war on terror is a term commonly applied to an international military campaign begun by the United States and the United Kingdom with support from other countries after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Post-Cold War Foreign Policy

Introduction

With the breakup of the Soviet Union into separate nations, and the re-emergence of the nation of Russia, the world of pro-U.S. and pro-Soviet alliances broke down. Different challenges presented themselves, such as climate change and the threat of nuclear terrorism. Regional powerbrokers in Iraq and Saddam Hussein challenged the peace with a surprise attack on the small nation of Kuwait in 1991.

President George H.W. Bush organized a coalition of allied and Middle Eastern powers that successfully pushed back the invading forces, but stopped short of invading Iraq and capturing Hussein. As a result, the dictator was free to cause mischief for another twelve years. After the Gulf War, many scholars like Zbigniew Brzezinski claimed that the lack of a new strategic vision for U.S. foreign policy resulted in many missed opportunities for its foreign policy. The United States mostly scaled back its foreign policy budget as well as its cold war defense budget during the 1990s, which amounted to 6.5% of GDP while focusing on domestic economic prosperity under President Clinton, who succeeded in achieving a budget surplus for 1999 and 2000.

The aftermath of the Cold War continues to influence world affairs. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the post–Cold War world was widely considered as unipolar, with the United States the sole remaining superpower. The Cold War defined the political role of the United States in the post–World War II world: by 1989 the U.S. held military alliances with 50 countries, and had 526,000 troops posted abroad in dozens of countries, with 326,000 in Europe (two-thirds of which in west Germany) and about 130,000 in Asia (mainly Japan and South Korea). The Cold War also marked the apex of peacetime military-industrial complexes, especially in the United States, and large-scale military funding of science. These complexes, though their origins may be found as early as the 19^th century, have grown considerably during the Cold War. The military-industrial complexes have great impact on their countries and help shape their society, policy and foreign relations.

New World Order

A concept that defined the world power after the Cold-War was known as the new world order. The most widely discussed application of the phrase of recent times came at the end of the Cold War. Presidents Mikhail Gorbachev and George H.W. Bush used the term to try to define the nature of the post Cold War era, and the spirit of a great power cooperation they hoped might materialize . Historians will look back and say this was no ordinary time but a defining moment: an unprecedented period of global change, and a time when one chapter ended and another began.

Bush and Gorbachev

Bush and Gorbachev helped shape international relation theories after the cold war.

War on Terrorism

A concept that defined the world power after the Cold-War was known as the new world order. The most widely discussed application of the phrase of recent times came at the end of the Cold War. Presidents Mikhail Gorbachev and George H.W. Bush used the term to try to define the nature of the post Cold War era, and the spirit of a great power cooperation they hoped might materialize . Historians will look back and say this was no ordinary time but a defining moment: an unprecedented period of global change, and a time when one chapter ended and another began.

Furthermore, when no weapons of mass destruction were found after a military conquest of Iraq, there was worldwide skepticism that the war had been fought to prevent terrorism, and the continuing war in Iraq has had serious negative public relations consequences for the image of the United States.

Multipolar World

The big change during these years was a transition from a bipolar world to a multipolar world. While the United States remains a strong power economically and militarily, rising nations such as China, India, Brazil, and Russia as well as a united Europe have challenged its dominance. Foreign policy analysts such as Nina Harchigian suggest that the six emerging big powers share common concerns: free trade, economic growth, prevention of terrorism, and efforts to stymie nuclear proliferation. And if they can avoid war, the coming decades can be peaceful and productive provided there are no misunderstandings or dangerous rivalries.

18.3.8: The War on Terrorism

Learning Objective

Identify the main elements of U.S. foreign policy during the War on Terror

Key Points

• The campaign’s official purpose was to eliminate al-Qaeda and other militant organizations, and the two main military operations associated with the War on Terror were Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and Operation Iraqi Freedom in Iraq.
• The Bush administration and the Western media used the term to denote a global military, political, legal and ideological struggle targeting both organizations designated as terrorist and regimes accused of supporting them.
• On 20 September 2001, in the wake of the 11 September attacks, George W. Bush delivered an ultimatum to the Taliban government of Afghanistan to turn over Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda leaders operating in the country or face attack.
• In October 2002, a large bipartisan majority in the United States Congress authorized the president to use force if necessary to disarm Iraq in order to “prosecute the war on terrorism. ” The Iraq War began in March 2003 with an air campaign, which was immediately followed by a U.S. ground invasion.

Key Terms

Islamist

A person who espouses Islamic fundamentalist beliefs.

War on Terror

The war on terror is a term commonly applied to an international military campaign begun by the United States and the United Kingdom with support from other countries after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

terrorism

The deliberate commission of an act of violence to create an emotional response through the suffering of the victims in the furtherance of a political or social agenda.

Introduction

The War on Terror is a term commonly applied to an international military campaign begun by the United States and United Kingdom with support from other countries after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks . The campaign’s official purpose was to eliminate al-Qaeda and other militant organizations. The two main military operations associated with the War on Terror were Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and Operation Iraqi Freedom in Iraq.

9/11 Attacks on the World Trade Center

The north face of Two World Trade Center (south tower) immediately after being struck by United Airlines Flight 175.

The phrase “War on Terror” was first used by U.S. President George W. Bush on 20 September 2001. The Bush administration and the Western media have since used the term to denote a global military, political, legal, and ideological struggle targeting organizations designated as terrorist and regimes accused of supporting them. It was typically used with a particular focus on Al-Qaeda and other militant Islamists. Although the term is not officially used by the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama, it is still commonly used by politicians, in the media, and officially by some aspects of government, such as the United States’ Global War on Terrorism Service Medal.

Precursor to 9/11 Attacks

The origins of al-Qaeda as a network inspiring terrorism around the world and training operatives can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan (December 1979–February 1989). The United States supported the Islamist mujahadeen guerillas against the military forces of the Soviet Union and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. In May 1996 the group World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders (WIFJAJC), sponsored by Osama bin Laden and later reformed as al-Qaeda, started forming a large base of operations in Afghanistan, where the Islamist extremist regime of the Taliban had seized power that same year. In February 1998, Osama bin Laden, as the head of al-Qaeda, signed a fatwā declaring war on the West and Israel, and later in May of that same year al-Qaeda released a video declaring war on the U.S. and the West.

U.S. Military Responses (Afghanistan)

On 20 September 2001, in the wake of the 11 September attacks, George W. Bush delivered an ultimatum to the Taliban government of Afghanistan to turn over Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda leaders operating in the country or face attack. The Taliban demanded evidence of bin Laden’s link to the 11 September attacks and, if such evidence warranted a trial, they offered to handle such a trial in an Islamic Court. The US refused to provide any evidence.

Subsequently, in October 2001, US forces invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime. On 7 October 2001, the official invasion began with British and U.S. forces conducting airstrike campaigns over enemy targets. Kabul, the capital city of Afghanistan, fell by mid-November. The remaining al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants fell back to the rugged mountains of eastern Afghanistan, mainly Tora Bora. In December, Coalition forces (the U.S. and its allies) fought within that region. It is believed that Osama bin Laden escaped into Pakistan during the battle.

U.S. Military Responses (Iraq)

Iraq had been listed as a State Sponsor of Terrorism by the U.S. since 1990, when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. Iraq was also on the list from 1979 to 1982; it had been removed so that the U.S. could provide material support to Iraq in its war with Iran. Hussein’s regime proved a continuing problem for the U.N. and Iraq’s neighbors due to its use of chemical weapons against Iranians and Kurds.

In October 2002, a large bipartisan majority in the United States Congress authorized the president to use force if necessary to disarm Iraq in order to “prosecute the war on terrorism. ” After failing to overcome opposition from France, Russia, and China against a UNSC resolution that would sanction the use of force against Iraq, and before the U.N. weapons inspectors had completed their inspections, the U.S. assembled a “Coalition of the Willing” composed of nations who pledged support for its policy of regime change in Iraq.

The Iraq War began in March 2003 with an air campaign, which was immediately followed by a U.S.-led ground invasion . The Bush administration stated that the invasion was the “serious consequences” spoken of in the UNSC Resolution 1441. The Bush administration also stated that the Iraq War was part of the War on Terror, a claim that was later questioned.

Baghdad, Iraq’s capital city, fell in April 2003 and Saddam Hussein’s government quickly dissolved. On 1 May 2003, Bush announced that major combat operations in Iraq had ended. However, an insurgency arose against the U.S.-led coalition and the newly developing Iraqi military and post-Saddam government. The insurgency, which included al-Qaeda affiliated groups, led to far more coalition casualties than the invasion. Iraq’s former president, Saddam Hussein, was captured by U.S. forces in December 2003. He was executed in 2006.

18.4: Challenges of Foreign Policy

18.4.1: Trade

U.S. foreign policy is characterized by a commitment to free trade and open borders to promote and strengthen national interests.

Learning Objective

Discuss the historical institutional arrangements that created the current framework of international trade and criticisms of it

Key Points

• While international trade has been present throughout much of history, its economic, social, and political importance have increased in recent centuries, mainly because of industrialization, advanced transportation, globalization, the growth of multinational corporations, and outsourcing.
• During the World War II, 44 countries signed the Bretton Woods Agreement, a system of monetary management that established the rules for commercial and financial relations among the world’s major industrial states.
• This Agreement resulted in the creation of organizations such as the the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (later divided into the World Bank and Bank for International Settlements).
• The World Trade Organization (WTO) is an organization that was formed in 1995 to supervise and liberalize international trade.
• International trade greatly contributes to the process of globalization, the processes of international integration arising from the interchange of world views, products, ideas, and other aspects of culture.
• The anti-globalization movement has grown in recent decades in reaction to the unequal power dynamics of globalization and international trade, and the policies that are used to exploit developing countries for the profit of the developed Western world.

Key Term

globalization

The process of international integration arising from the interchange of world views, products, ideas, and other aspects of culture; advances in transportation and telecommunications infrastructure, including the rise of the Internet, are major factors that precipitate interdependence of economic and cultural activities.

International Trade

International trade is the exchange of goods and services across national borders. In most countries, it represents a significant part of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). While international trade has been practiced throughout much of history, its economic, social, and political importance have become increasingly relevant in recent times, mainly due to industrialization, advanced transportation, globalization, the growth of multinational corporations, and outsourcing .

The Bretton Woods Agreement

During World War II, 44 countries signed the Bretton Woods Agreement. This system of monetary management established the rules for commercial and financial relations among the world’s major industrial states, and was the first example of a fully negotiated monetary order intended to govern monetary relations among independent nation-states. The agreement was intended to prevent national trade barriers that could create global economic depressions. The political basis for the Bretton Woods Agreement was in the confluence of two key conditions: the shared experiences of the Great Depression, and the concentration of power in a small number of states which was further enhanced by the exclusion of a number of important nations due to ongoing war.

The agreement set up rules and institutions to regulate the international political economy, resulting in the creation of organizations such as the the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (later divided into the World Bank and Bank for International Settlements). These organizations became operational in 1946 after enough countries ratified the agreement. Currently, the Doha round of World Trade Organization negotiations aims to lower barriers to trade around the world, with a focus on making trade more favorable for so-called “developing” countries, though talks have faced a divide between “developed” countries and the major “developing” countries.

The World Trade Organization (WTO)

The World Trade Organization (WTO) is an organization that was formed in 1995 to supervise and liberalize international trade . The organization deals with regulation of trade between participating countries; it provides a framework for negotiating and formalizing trade agreements, and a dispute resolution process aimed at enforcing participants’ adherence to WTO agreements which are signed by representatives of member governments and ratified by their parliaments.

WTO Logo

The WTO, succeeding GATT in 1995, is an organization that seeks to liberalize international trade.

Trade, Globalization, and the Anti-Globalization Movement

International trade greatly contributes to the process of globalization, the processes of international integration arising from the interchange of world views, products, ideas, and other aspects of culture. Advances in transportation and telecommunications infrastructure, including the rise of the telegraph and its posterity the Internet, are major factors in globalization, generating further interdependence of economic and cultural activities. In 2000, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) identified four basic aspects of globalization: trade and transactions, capital and investment movements, migration and movement of people, and the dissemination of knowledge.

Globalization has been criticized in recent decades for the unequal power dynamics of international trade, and the policies that are used to exploit developing countries for the profit of the developed Western world. The anti-globalization movement is critical of the globalization of corporate capitalism for these reasons. Many anti-globalization activists, however, call for forms of global integration that provide better democratic representation, advancement of human rights, fair trade and sustainable development and therefore feel the term “anti-globalization” is misleading.

In general, the anti-globalization movement is especially opposed to the various abuses which are perpetuated by globalization and the international institutions which are believed to promote neoliberalism without regard to ethical standards. Common targets include the World Bank (WB), International Monetary Fund (IMF), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) and free trade treaties like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), the Trans Pacific Trade Agreement (TPPA), the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). In light of the economic gap between rich and poor countries, movement adherents claim “free trade” without regulations in place to protect the environment, the health and well being of workers, and the economies of “developing” countries contributes only to strengthening the power of industrialized nations (often termed the “global North” in opposition to the developing world’s “global South”).

The anti-globalization movement is considered a rather new and modern day social movement, as the issues it is fighting against are relevant in today’s time. However, the events that occurred which fuels the movement can be traced back through the lineage of the movement of a 500-year old history of resistance against European colonialism and U.S. imperialism, in which the continent of Africa and many other areas of the world were colonized and stripped of their resources for the profit of the Western world.

One of the most infamous tactics of the movement is the Battle of Seattle in 1999, where grassroots activists organized large and creative protests against the World Trade Organization’s Third Ministerial Meeting in order to gain the attention towards the issue of globalization. It is still one of the most significant and memorable social movement protests in the past 20 years.

Contemporary Issues in International Trade

Issues currently associated with international trade are: intellectual property rights, in that creations of the mind for which exclusive rights are recognized in law are considered essential for economic growth; smuggling, especially as it relates to human and drug trafficking; outsourcing, the contracting out of business processes to another country, generally one with lower wages; fair trade, which promotes the use of labor, environmental, and social standards for the production of commodities; and trade sanctions, in which punitive economic measures are taken against a defaulting country.

18.4.2: Immigration and Border Security

Immigration and border security are two important issues for United States policy.

Learning Objective

Identify the relationship between immigration issues and national security

Key Points

• Illegal immigrants are those non-citizens who enter the United States without government permission and in violation of United States nationality law or stay beyond the termination date of a visa, also in violation of the law.
• Illegal immigrants who come generally for economic opportunities or to escape political oppression continue to outpace the number of legal immigrants – a trend that has held steady since the 1990s.
• The challenge of illegal immigration is closely linked with that of border security, the concept of which is related to the persistent threat of terrorism.

Key Term

visa

A permit to enter and leave a country, normally issued by the authorities of the country to be visited.

Immigration and border security are two important issues for U.S. policy.

Though immigration to the United States has been a major source of economic growth and cultural change throughout American history, the recent discourse surrounding immigration deals mostly with illegal immigration. Illegal immigrants are those non-citizens who enter the United States without government permission and are in violation of United States nationality law or stay beyond the termination date of a visa, also in violation of the law.

The illegal immigrant population in the United States in 2008 was estimated by the Center for Immigration Studies to be about 11 million people, down from 12.5 million people in 2007. Other estimates range from 7 to 20 million. According to a Pew Hispanic Center report, in 2005, 56% of illegal immigrants were from Mexico; 22% were from other Latin American countries, primarily from Central America; 13% were from Asia; 6% were from Europe and Canada; and 3% were from Africa and the rest of the world.

Immigration to the U.S.

Rate of immigration to the United States relative to sending countries’ population size, 2001–2005

Illegal immigrants who come generally for economic opportunities or to escape political oppression, continue to outpace the number of legal immigrants – a trend that has held steady since the 1990s. While the majority of illegal immigrants continue to concentrate in places with existing large Hispanic communities, an increasing number of them are settling throughout the rest of the country.

The challenge of illegal immigration is closely linked with that of border security, the concept of which is related to the persistent threat of terrorism. Border security includes the protection of land borders, ports, and airports and after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, many questioned whether the threat posed by the largely unchecked 3,017 mile Canadian border, the 1,933 mile Mexican border, and the many unsecured ports.

18.4.3: Terrorism

The threat of terrorism is one of the greatest challenges facing the United States and the international community.

Learning Objective

Discuss the War on Terror campaign against religious fundamentalist groups and individuals who engage in terrorism

Key Points

• Terrorism generally refers to those violent acts that are intended to create fear (terror). The acts are perpetrated for a religious, political, and/or ideological goal. They deliberately target or disregard the safety of civilians in order to gain publicity for a group, cause, or individual.
• In current international affairs, the threat of Islamic terrorism, a form of religious terrorism committed by Muslims for the purpose of achieving varying political and/or religious ends, has been particularly prevalent.
• The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, committed by members of Al-Qaeda, left nearly 3,000 people dead and would mark the beginning of the War on Terror.

Key Term

revolutionary

Of or pertaining to a revolution in government; tending to, or promoting, revolution; as, revolutionary war; revolutionary measures; revolutionary agitators.

The threat of terrorism is one of the greatest challenges facing the United States and the international community. Common definitions of terrorism refer to those violent acts that are intended to create fear (terror). The acts are perpetrated for a religious, political, and/or ideological goal. They deliberately target or disregard the safety of civilians in order to gain publicity for a group, cause, or individual. Terrorism has been practiced by a broad array of political organizations, including right-wing and left-wing political parties, nationalistic groups, religious groups, revolutionary groups, and ruling governments.

Islamic Terrorism

In current international affairs, the threat of Islamic terrorism, a form of religious terrorism committed by Muslims for the purpose of achieving varying political and/or religious ends, has been particularly prevalent. Islamic terrorism has taken place in the Middle East, Africa, Europe, South Asia, Southeast Asia, and the United States since the 1970’s. Islamic terrorist organizations have been known to engage in tactics including suicide attacks, hijackings, kidnappings, and recruiting new members through the Internet. Well-known Islamic terrorist organizations include Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad.

The 9/11 Attacks and the War on Terror

The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, in which members of Al-Qaeda under the leadership of Osama bin Laden hijacked and crashed four passenger jets in New York, Virginia, and Pennsylvania, left nearly 3,000 people dead. These attacks marked the beginning of the “War on Terror,” an international military campaign led by the United States and the United Kingdom (with the support of NATO and non-NATO allies) against Al-Qaeda and other associated militant organizations with the stated goal of eliminating them. The War on Terror would include the military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq .

September 11, 2001 attacks

The attack on the World Trade Center in New York City on September 11, 2001.

18.4.4: Nuclear Weapons

The proliferation of nuclear weapons, explosive devices which derive force from nuclear reactions, is a key challenge of foreign policy.

Learning Objective

Identify the history of nuclear weapons and international efforts to regulate them

Key Points

• Only two nuclear weapons have been used in the course of warfare, both by the United States against Japan near the end of World War II.
• In 1957, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was established under the mandate of the United Nations to encourage development of peaceful applications for nuclear technology, provide international safeguards against its misuse, and facilitate the application of safety measures in its use.
• Currently, the prospect of nuclear technology falling into the hands of rogue states and terrorist organizations is considered a major threat to international security.

Key Terms

fission

The process of splitting the nucleus of an atom into smaller particles; nuclear fission

fusion

A nuclear reaction in which nuclei combine to form more massive nuclei with the concomitant release of energy

The proliferation of nuclear weapons, explosive devices which derive their destructive force from nuclear reactions (either fission or a combination of fission and fusion), is an important challenge of foreign policy.

Only a few nations possess such weapons or are suspected of seeking them. The only countries known to have detonated nuclear weapons—and that acknowledge possessing such weapons—are (chronologically by date of first test) the United States, the Soviet Union (succeeded as a nuclear power by Russia), the United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea. In addition, Israel is also widely believed to possess nuclear weapons, though it does not acknowledge having them. One state, South Africa, fabricated nuclear weapons in the past, but has since disassembled their arsenal and submitted to international safeguards.

Only two nuclear weapons have been used in the course of warfare, both by the United States near the end of World War II. On August 6, 1945, a uranium gun-type fission bomb was detonated over the Japanese city of Hiroshima. Three days later, on August 9, a plutonium implosion-type fission bomb was exploded over Nagasaki, Japan. These two bombings resulted in the deaths of approximately 200,000 Japanese people—mostly civilians—from acute injuries sustained from the explosions.

Since the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, nuclear weapons have been detonated on over two thousand occasions for testing purposes and demonstrations. Because of the immense military power they can confer, the political control of nuclear weapons has been a key issue for as long as they have existed; in most countries the use of nuclear force can only be authorized by the head of government or head of state. In 1957, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was established under the mandate of the United Nations to encourage development of peaceful applications for nuclear technology, provide international safeguards against its misuse, and facilitate the application of safety measures in its use.

By the 1960s, steps were being taken to limit both the proliferation of nuclear weapons to other countries and the environmental effects of nuclear testing. The Partial Test Ban Treaty (1963) restricted all nuclear testing to underground facilities, to prevent contamination from nuclear fallout, while the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (1968) attempted to place restrictions on the types of activities signatories could participate in, with the goal of allowing the transference of non-military nuclear technology to member countries without fear of proliferation. Currently, the prospect of nuclear technology falling into the hands of rogue states and terrorist organizations is considered a major threat to international security.

18.4.5: Iraq

Particularly since the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003, U.S. relations with Iraq have been central to its foreign policy.

Learning Objective

Discuss the history of U.S.-Iraq relations and the U.S. Occupation of Iraq

Key Points

• After the September 11, 2001 attacks, the governments of the United States and the United Kingdom claimed that Iraq’s alleged possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) posed a threat to their security and that of their coalitional and regional allies.
• On March 20, 2003, a U.S.-led coalition conducted a military invasion of Iraq, referred to as Operation Iraqi Freedom, without declaring war.
• The last U.S. troops left Iraqi territory on December 18, 2011 after Barack Obama announced an eighteen month withdrawal window for combat forces.

Key Terms

Shia

the second largest denomination of Islam; “followers”, “faction”, or “party” of Muhammad’s son-in-law Ali, whom the Shia believe to be Muhammad’s successor

sectarian

Of, or relating to a sect.

Sunni

The branch of Islam that believes that the Qur’an is the final authority, and that their leaders have no special sacred wisdom.

Since the United States recognized an independent Iraq in 1930, relations with that nation have been an important aspect of U.S. foreign policy.

After the September 11, 2001 attacks, the governments of the United States and the United Kingdom claimed that Iraq’s alleged possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) posed a threat to their security and that of their coalitional and regional allies. Some U.S. officials also accused Iraqi President Saddam Hussein of harboring and supporting al-Qaeda, but no evidence of a meaningful connection was ever found. Other proclaimed accusations against Iraq included its financial support for the families of Palestinian suicide bombers, Iraqi government human rights abuses, and an effort to spread democracy to the country.

On March 20, 2003, a U.S.-led coalition conducted a military invasion of Iraq without declaring war. The invasion, referred to as Operation Iraqi Freedom, led to an occupation and the eventual capture of President Hussein, who was later tried in an Iraqi court of law and executed by the new Iraqi government. Violence against coalition forces and among various sectarian groups soon led to the Iraqi insurgency, strife between many Sunni and Shia Iraqi groups, and the emergence of a new faction of al-Qaeda in Iraq.

Operation Iraqi Freedom

A U.S. Marine tank in Baghdad during the Iraq War.

The “One weekend a month, two weeks a year” slogan has lost most of its relevance since the Iraq War, when nearly 28% of total US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan at the end of 2007 consisted of mobilized personnel of the National Guard and other Reserve components. [35] In July 2012, the Army’s top general stated his intention to increase the annual drill requirement from two weeks per year to up to seven weeks per year.

As public opinion favoring troop withdrawals increased and as Iraqi forces began to take responsibility for security, member nations of the Coalition withdrew their forces. In late 2008, the U.S. and Iraqi governments approved a Status of Forces Agreement, effective through January 1, 2012. The Iraqi Parliament also ratified a Strategic Framework Agreement with the U.S., aimed at ensuring cooperation in constitutional rights, threat deterrence, education, energy development, and in other areas.

In late February 2009, newly-elected U.S. President Barack Obama announced an eighteen month withdrawal window for combat forces, with approximately 50,000 troops remaining in the country “to advise and train Iraqi security forces and to provide intelligence and surveillance. ” On October 21, 2011, President Obama announced that all U.S. troops and trainers would leave Iraq by the end of the year, bringing the U.S. mission in Iraq to an end. The last U.S. troops left Iraqi territory on December 18, 2011.

18.4.6: Afghanistan

The relationship between the United States and Afghanistan has become an integral aspect of U.S. foreign policy.

Learning Objective

Discuss the nature of the U.S. foreign policy toward Afghanistan since 2001

Key Points

• Following the attacks of September 11, 2001– thought to be orchestrated by Osama bin Laden, who was residing in Afghanistan under asylum at the time– the United States launched and led Operation Enduring Freedom.
• The United States has taken a leading role in the overall reconstruction of Afghanistan by investing billions of dollars in national roads, government and educational institutions, and the Afghan military and national police force.
• U.S. forces are scheduled to begin leaving between mid-2011 to the end of 2014. Concerns remain regarding the Taliban insurgency, the role of Pakistan in training those insurgents, and the risk of Afghanistan degenerating into a failed state after the withdrawal.

Key Terms

insurgency

rebellion; revolt; the state of being insurgent

Taliban

A Sunni Islamic student movement in Afghanistan; organized in 1994 by the radical mullah “Mohammad Omar”

The relationship between the United States and Afghanistan has become an integral aspect of U.S. foreign policy.

Following the attacks of September 11, 2001– thought to be orchestrated by Osama bin Laden, who was residing in Afghanistan under asylum at the time– the United States launched and led Operation Enduring Freedom. This major military operation was aimed at removing the Taliban government from power and capturing Al-Qaeda members, including Osama bin Laden himself. Following the overthrow of the Taliban, the U.S. supported the new government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai by maintaining a high level of troops in the area, as well as by combating Taliban insurgency. Afghanistan and the United States resumed diplomatic ties in late 2001.

The United States has taken a leading role in the overall reconstruction of Afghanistan by investing billions of dollars in national roads, government and educational institutions, and the Afghan military and national police force. In 2005, the United States and Afghanistan signed a strategic partnership agreement, committing both nations to a long-term relationship.

The U.S. Armed Forces has been gradually increasing its troop level in Afghanistan since 2002, reaching about 100,000 in 2010. They are scheduled to begin leaving between mid-2011 to the end of 2014. In 2012, Presidents Obama and Karzai signed a strategic partnership agreement between their respective countries, designating Afghanistan as a major non-NATO ally. Concerns remain regarding the Taliban insurgency, the role of Pakistan in training those insurgents, the drug trade, the effectiveness of Afghan security forces, and the risk of Afghanistan degenerating into a failed state after the withdrawal.

Operation Enduring Freedom

An American soldier on patrol in Afghanistan

18.4.7: China

Three issues of particular importance in Chinese-American relations are economic trade, the contested status of Taiwan, and human rights.

Learning Objective

Examine the social, political and economic issues that are significant for U.S.-China relations

Key Points

• China, which became the world’s second largest economy in 2010, may overtake the United States and become the world’s largest economy by 2030, if current trends persist.
• American support for the island nation of Taiwan, which China claims as one of its provinces and has threatened to take over by force, is another source of tension.
• The Chinese government’s stance toward human rights, which has been criticized by international humanitarian groups, is another source of controversy.

Key Terms

joint venture

A cooperative partnership between two individuals or businesses in which both profits and risks are shared

one child policy

A policy of population control in China that officially limits married, urban couples to having only one child

The political, economic, and military rise of China, with its enormous population of more than 1.3 billion people, is a key foreign policy challenge for the United States. Within current U.S.-China relations, three issues of particular importance stand out: economic trade, the status of Taiwan, and human rights.

U.S.-China relations

President Obama and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao

Since China and the United States resumed trade relations in 1972 and 1973, U.S. companies have entered into numerous agreements with Chinese counterparts that have established more than 20,000 equity joint ventures, contractual joint ventures, and wholly foreign-owned enterprises. The American trade deficit with China exceeded $350 billion in 2006, and is the U.S.’ s largest bilateral trade deficit.

China, which became the world’s second largest economy in 2010, may overtake the United States and become the world’s largest economy by 2030, if current trends continue (although this growth might be limited by domestic challenges facing China, including income inequality and pollution). Among foreign nations, China holds the largest amount of U.S. public debt and has been a vocal critic of U.S. deficits and fiscal policy. In turn, the United States has criticized China’s undervaluation of its currency, the Renminbi.

American support for the island of Taiwan, which China claims as one of its provinces and has threatened to take over by force, is another source of tension. The U.S. maintains sympathy for a independent Taiwan due to its liberal, pluralistic democracy, and gives Taiwan extensive political and military support. This support has resulted in threats of retaliation from China.

The Chinese government’s policy toward human rights is another source of controversy. International human rights organizations have identified a number of potential violations in China, including the use of capital punishment, the application of the one child policy, the denial of independence to Tibet, the absence of a free press, the absence of an independent judiciary with due process, the absence of labor rights, and the absence of religious freedom.

18.4.8: Israel and Palestine

The conflict between the State of Israel and the Palestinians is an important issue affecting American and international policy.

Learning Objective

Explain the importance of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for American foreign policy in the Middle East

Key Points

• Many currently consider the central foreign policy issue in the conflict to be the creation of an independent Palestinian state next to the existing Jewish state of Israel.
• The Oslo Accords of 1993 allowed the Palestinian National Authority to have autonomy over large parts of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, although terrorism from Palestinian extremist groups and the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995 would derail further negotiations.
• Current issues for negotiations include: mutual recognition, borders, terrorism and security, water rights, control of Jerusalem, Israeli settlements, Palestinian incitement, and finding a solution for Palestinian refugees from Israel’s War of Independence in 1948.

Key Term

Palestinian

An inhabitant of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, legally governed by the Palestinian National Authority.

The conflict between the State of Israel and the Palestinians is an important issue affecting American and international policy. While the United States has a longstanding policy of political, military, and economic support for Israel, it often must balance such support with its relations with Arab nations and its commitment to a Palestinian state.

The conflict dates back to early Arab opposition to Jewish national sovereignty and numerous wars fought between Israel and neighboring Arab states. However, many currently consider the central foreign policy issue to be the creation of an independent Palestinian state next to the existing Jewish state of Israel. Most of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, territories taken by Israel during the Six-Day War in 1967, are considered acceptable locations for a future Palestinian state.

Numerous efforts have been made to achieve peace through a negotiated settlement between the Israeli government and its Palestinian counterparts. Most prominently, the Oslo Accords of 1993 allowed the Palestinian National Authority to have autonomy over large parts of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, although a campaign of terrorism from Palestinian extremist groups and the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995 would derail further negotiations.

The Oslo Accords

The signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993

Current issues for negotiations include: mutual recognition, borders, terrorism and security, water rights, control of Jerusalem, Israeli settlements, Palestinian incitement, and finding a solution for Palestinian refugees from Israel’s War of Independence in 1948. Another challenge is the lack of unity among Palestinians, reflected in the political struggle between Fatah, which controls the Palestinian areas of the West Bank, and the terrorist group Hamas, which has controlled the Gaza Strip since Israel’s withdrawal from that territory in 2005.

18.4.9: Humanitarian Efforts

Humanitarian aid is material or logistical assistance in response to crises including natural and man-made disasters.

Learning Objective

Compare and contrast humanitarian aid with development aid

Key Points

• The primary objective of humanitarian aid is to save lives, alleviate suffering and maintain human dignity.
• The humanitarian community has initiated a number of inter-agency initiatives to improve accountability, quality and performance in humanitarian action.
• Prominent humanitarian organizations include Doctors Without Borders, Mercy Corps and the International Red Cross.

Key Terms

humanitarian

Concerned with people’s welfare and the alleviation of suffering; humane or compassionate.

socioeconomic

Of or pertaining to social and economic factors.

Humanitarian aid is material or logistical assistance in response to crises including natural and man-made disasters. The primary objective of humanitarian aid is to save lives, alleviate suffering and maintain human dignity. Humanitarian aid differs from development aid, which seeks to address the underlying socioeconomic factors leading to a crises.

Aid is funded by donations from individuals, corporations, governments and other organizations. The funding and delivery of humanitarian aid has become increasingly international in scope. This makes it much more responsive and effective in coping with major emergencies. With humanitarian aid efforts sometimes criticized for a lack of transparency, the humanitarian community has initiated a number of inter-agency initiatives to improve its accountability, quality and performance.

The People in Aid initiative, for example, links seven areas that would improve the operations of aid organizations – health, safety and security learning; training and development; recruitment and selection; consultation and communication; support management and leadership; staff policies and practices; and human resources strategy.

Prominent humanitarian organizations include Doctors Without Borders, Mercy Corps and the International Red Cross. Major humanitarian projects include the Berlin Airlift, in which U.S. and U.K governments flew supplies into the Western-held sectors of Berlin during the Soviet blockade of 1948-1949. Another example is the aid efforts for refugees felling from the fighting in Bosnia and Kosovo in 1993 and 1999, respectively .

Humanitarian aid

Aid for refugees of the Kosovo War

18.5: Modern Foreign Policy

18.5.1: Diplomacy

Standard diplomacy involves government-to-government communication; modern diplomacy has begun to emphasize public diplomacy as well.

Learning Objective

Compare and contrast public diplomacy with standard diplomacy

Key Points

• Through diplomacy, governments of one country engage governments of another country. Usually this is accomplished by diplomats (e.g. ambassadors) in an official, U.S. government capacity in order to improve relationships between two countries, negotiate treaties, etc.
• Through public diplomacy, governments attempt to influence and communicate with the societies of another country. Film, music, arts, social and educational exchange programs, direct radio broadcasts, and the Internet can all be used to achieve public diplomacy.
• Public diplomacy has increased in importance since 9/11. The U.S. government has actively sought to use public diplomacy to improve their reputation abroad, particularly in the Middle East.
• Increasing globalization has caused public diplomacy to grow in importance in modern foreign policy. People– not just states– matter in an increasingly interconnected world.

Key Terms

diplomacy

The art and practice of conducting international relations by negotiating alliances, treaties, agreements, etc., bilaterally or multilaterally, between states and sometimes international organizations or even between policies with varying statuses, such as those of monarchs and their princely vassals.

foreign policy

A government’s policy relating to matters beyond its own jurisdiction: usually relations with other nations and international organisations.

public diplomacy

The communication between foreign societies, intended primarily to establish a dialogue designed to inform and influence.

Public Diplomacy

Public diplomacy has become increasingly important in modern foreign policy. Public diplomacy– or people’s diplomacy, broadly speaking– is the communication between foreign societies, intended primarily to establish a dialogue designed to inform and influence. It is practiced through a variety of instruments and methods ranging from personal contact and media interviews to the Internet and educational exchanges.

Public Diplomacy Versus Standard Diplomacy

Standard diplomacy can be described as the way in which government leaders communicate with each other at the highest levels; it is the elite diplomacy we are all familiar with. By contrast, public diplomacy focuses on the way in which a country (or multi-lateral organization such as the United Nations) communicates with citizens in other societies . A country may be acting deliberately or inadvertently, and through both official and private individuals and institutions. Effective public diplomacy begins with the premise that dialogue, rather than a sales pitch, is often central to achieving the goals of foreign policy: public diplomacy must be seen as a two-way street. Furthermore, public diplomacy advocates many differing views as represented by private American individuals and organizations in addition to the official views of the US government.

Ambassadors and Fulbright Scholars

Eric G. John, the U.S. Ambassador to Thailand from 2007-2010, speaks at a reception for Fulbright Grantees in Thailand. As an ambassador and formal representative of the U.S. government, John addresses traditional, elite-to-elite diplomacy, while the Fulbright program emphasizes public diplomacy.

Traditional diplomacy actively engages one government with another government. In traditional diplomacy, U.S. embassy officials represent the U.S. government in a host country primarily by maintaining relations and conducting official U.S. government business with the officials of the host government, whereas public diplomacy primarily engages many diverse, non-governmental elements of a society .

US Embassies

Maintaining an embassy in every recognized country is an important traditional diplomatic task. Depicted here is the U.S. embassy in London, England.

Avenues for Public Diplomacy

Film, television, music, sports, video games and other social/cultural activities are seen by public diplomacy advocates as enormously important avenues for otherwise diverse citizens to understand each other, as well as integral to international cultural understanding, considered a key goal of modern public diplomacy. This goal involves not only shaping the messages that a country wishes to present abroad– by developing the necessary tools of conversation and persuasion– but also analyzing and understanding the ways that the message is interpreted by diverse societies.

Instruments used for practicing public diplomacy include broadcasting stations (The Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty), exchange programs (Fulbright, the International Visitor Leadership Program), American arts and performances in foreign countries, the Internet, and personal contact .

Voice of America

Pictured is the Voice of America headquarters in Washington, DC. Media such as Voice of America seek to influence foreign societies by making American policy seem more favorable. This is a key component of modern public diplomacy.

Globalization and Increase in U.S. Public Diplomacy

Public diplomacy has been an essential element of American foreign policy for decades. It was an important tool in influencing public opinion during the Cold War. Since the attacks of September 11, 2001, the term has come back into vogue and the practice has increased in importance as the United States government works to improve their reputation abroad, particularly in the Middle East and among those in the Islamic world. Numerous panels, including those sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations, have evaluated American efforts in public diplomacy since 9/11 and have written reports recommending that the United States take various actions to improve the effectiveness of its public diplomacy.

This traditional concept is expanded on with the idea of adopting what is called “population-centric foreign affairs” within which foreign populations assume a central component of foreign policy. Since people, not just states, are of global importance in a world where technology and migration increasingly face everyone, an entire new door of policy is opened.

18.5.2: The United Nations

The United Nations is the most important and influential international, intergovernmental organization.

Learning Objective

Analyze the United States position toward the United Nations

Key Points

• The United Nations was established in 1945 to replace the failed League of Nations, with the goal of promoting peace by establishing a forum for cooperation, dialogue, and humanitarian response.
• The UN’s main bodies include the Security Council, the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council, the Secretariat, and the International Court of Justice. The U.S. is a permanent member of the UN Security Council, which is arguably the most influential body of the UN.
• The UN’s main objectives include peacekeeping and security, disarmament, human rights protection and humanitarian assistance, and social and economic development.
• The U.S. led the creation of the UN, and has been an influential player in the UN’s work since its beginning.
• Since the U.S. has taken on the role of the world’s sole superpower, the UN and the U.S. have often conflicted. In particular, the UN and the U.S. have conflicted over the U.S.’ s debts to the UN, as well as the U.S.’ s 2003 near-unilateral invasion of Iraq.

Key Terms

multilateral

Involving more than one party (often used in politics to refer to negotiations, talks, or proceedings involving several nations).

international organization

Often referred to as intergovernmental organization; organizations that are made up primarily of sovereign states (referred to as member states).

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

A declaration adopted by the United Nations General Assembly after World War II that represents the first global expression of rights to which all human beings are inherently entitled. It includes economic, political and social rights.

What is the United Nations?

The United Nations (UN) is an intergovernmental, international organization consisting of all 193 states in the world, whose stated aims are facilitating cooperation in international law, international security, economic development, social progress, human rights, and the achievement of world peace. The UN was founded in 1945 to stop wars between countries and to provide a platform for dialogue. It contains multiple subsidiary organizations to carry out its missions.

History of the UN

After World War II, most government leaders recognized that humankind could not afford a third world war. The United Nations was established to replace the flawed League of Nations, in order to maintain international peace and promote cooperation in solving international economic, social and humanitarian problems.

In 1945, the UN officially came into existence upon ratification of the United Nations Charter by the five then-permanent members of the Security Council—France, the Republic of China, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and the United States—and by a majority of the other 46 signatories.

Organization of the UN

The organization’s principle organs are as follows:

1. The General Assembly is the main deliberative assembly and is composed of all United Nations member states.
2. The Security Council (UNSC) is charged with maintaining peace and security among countries. It is composed of 15 member states, including 5 permanent members–China, France, Russia, the UK, and the US.
3. The Economic and Social Council promotes international economic and social progress through cooperation and development.
4. The Secretariat, headed by the Secretary-General, provides studies, information and facilities needed by the UN bodies.
5. The International Court of Justice is the primary judicial organ of the UN.

Other prominent UN agencies exist to work on particular issues. Some of the most well-known agencies are the International Atomic Energy Agency, the World Bank, the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Food Programme (WFP), and the United Nation’s Children’s Fund (UNICEF). It is through these agencies that the UN performs most of its humanitarian work.

The UN is financed from assessed and voluntary contributions from member states. The General Assembly approves the regular budget and determines the assessment for each member.

Objectives of the UN

One of the main objectives of the UN is peacekeeping and security . With approval from the Security Council, the UN sends peacekeepers, voluntarily provided by UN member states, to regions where armed conflict has recently ceased. The goal of the peacekeepers is to enforce the terms of peace agreements and to discourage combatants from resuming hostilities.

UN Peacekeepers

A UN peacekeeper carries out operations in Haiti. Peacekeeping and security are primary objectives of the UN, and UN peacekeepers have been deployed around the world.

The UN is a world leader in human rights protection and humanitarian assistance. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, though not legally binding, was adopted by the General Assembly in 1948 as a common standard of achievement for all. The UN and its agencies are central in upholding and implementing the principles enshrined in the Declaration, from assisting countries transitioning to democracy, to supporting women’s rights, to providing humanitarian aid.

Lastly, the UN also focuses on social and economic development through the UN Development Program (UNDP) and other agencies like the WHO and the World Bank.

The United States and the UN

The United States is a charter member of the United Nations and one of five permanent members of the UN Security Council. The most important American contribution to the United Nations system is perhaps the Bretton Woods conference. This conference took place in 1944, and its goal was “to create a new international monetary and trade regime that was stable and predictable.” This new system opened world markets, promoted a liberal economy and was implemented through different institutions, such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

Since 1991 the United States has been the world’s dominant military, economic, social and political power (plus it hosts the UN Headquarters itself in New York City ). The United Nations was not designed for such a unipolar world with a single superpower, and conflict between an ascendant U.S. and other UN members has increased.

UN Building in New York

This picture shows the UN Secretariat’s headquarters in New York City.

One of such conflicts occurred when the U.S. refused to pay its arrears in order to force UN compliance with U.S. wishes, as well as to cause the UN to reduce the U.S. assessment.

Another conflict between the U.S. and some UN members arose in 2003 over the issue of Iraq. U.S. President Bush maintained that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in violation of his post-Gulf War obligations. In order to find these WMDs, Bush and a “coalition of the willing” invaded Iraq without explicit UN Security Council approval, causing friction within the multilateral UN .

2003 Invasion of Iraq

President George W. Bush addresses the nation in 2003, announcing the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom. The U.S.’ s near-unilateral invasion of Iraq caused tension in the multilateral UN.

18.5.3: The International Monetary Structure

The international monetary structure involves international institutions, regional trading blocs, private players, and national governments.

Learning Objective

Explain the role played by the United States over the history of the international monetary structure

Key Points

• The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is one of the most prominent institutions in the international monetary structure. The IMF oversees the global financial system and offers assistance to states.
• Another international institution, the World Bank, is important in the global monetary structure as it provides assistance and loans to developing nations.
• The World Trade Organization is an international institution that helps settle trade disputes and negotiate trade arrangements among states.
• Other important institutions in the international monetary structure include private participants (such as banks or insurance companies), regional trading blocs (such as the Eurozone or NAFTA), and national governments.
• Some argue that because of the U.S.’ s economic power and global influence, the international monetary structure has been created to match the U.S.’ s preferences and national interests.
• The U.S. helped establish the current structure of the international monetary system by leading the creation of the Bretton Woods system in 1944.

Key Terms

Washington Consensus

A term that refers to a set of ten relatively specific economic policy prescriptions that constitute the “standard” reform package promoted for crisis-wracked developing countries.

World Bank

A group of five financial organizations whose purpose is economic development and the elimination of poverty.

International Monetary Fund

The international organization entrusted with overseeing the global financial system by monitoring foreign exchange rates and balance of payments, as well as offering technical and financial assistance when asked. Abbreviated as IMF.

Major Components of the International Monetary Structure

The main components in the international monetary structure are global institutions (such as the International Monetary Fund and Bank for International Settlements), national agencies and government departments (such as central banks and finance ministries), private institutions acting on the global scale (such as banks and hedge funds), and regional institutions (like the Eurozone or NAFTA).

International Institutions

The most prominent international institutions are the International Monetary Fund (IMF) , the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization (WTO). The IMF keeps account of the international balance of payments accounts of member states, but also lends money as a last resort for members in financial distress. Membership is based on the amount of money a country provides to the fund relative to the size of its role in the international trading system.

IMF Headquarters

The headquarters of the International Monetary Fund in Washington, DC.

The World Bank aims to provide funding, takes up credit risk, or offers favorable terms to developing countries for development projects that couldn’t be obtained by the private sector.

The World Trade Organization settles trade disputes and negotiates international trade agreements in its rounds of talks (currently the Doha Round) .

Members of the WTO

This map depicts the member states of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Dark green states are members; light green are members of the EU and thus members of the WTO as well; blue states are observer states; and gray states have no official interaction with the WTO. Notice the global reach of organizations like the WTO.

Private Participants

Also important to the international monetary structure are private participants, such as players active in the markets of stocks, bonds, foreign exchange, derivatives, and commodities, as well as investment banking. This includes commercial banks, hedge funds and private equity, pension funds, insurance companies, mutual funds, and sovereign wealth funds.

Regional Institutions

Certain regional institutions also play a role in the structure of the international monetary system. For example, the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), the Eurozone, Mercosur, and North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) are all examples of regional trade blocs, which are very important to the international monetary structure .

Bill Clinton Signs NAFTA

In this picture, President Bill Clinton signs the North American Free Trade Agreement into law. NAFTA, a free trade area between Canada, the U.S., and Mexico, is an example of the importance of regional trade blocs to the international monetary structure. NAFTA is also an example of the U.S.’ s disproportionate power in determining the direction of the international monetary structure.

Government Institutions

Governments are also a part of the international monetary structure, primarily through their finance ministries: they pass the laws and regulations for financial markets, and set the tax burden for private players such as banks, funds, and exchanges. They also participate actively through discretionary spending. They are closely tied to central banks that issue government debt, set interest rates and deposit requirements, and intervene in the foreign exchange market.

Perspectives on the International Monetary Structure

The liberal view of the international monetary structure holds that the exchange of currencies should be determined not by state institutions but instead individual players at a market level. This view has been labelled as the Washington Consensus. The social democratic view challenges the liberal view, advocating for the tempering of market mechanisms and the institution of economic safeguards in an attempt to ensure financial stability and redistribution. Besides the liberal and social democratic views, neo-Marxists are highly critical of the modern financial system in that it promotes inequality between state players, particularly holding the view that the wealthier countries abuse the financial system to exercise control of developing countries’ economies.

U.S. Influence on the International Monetary Structure

The most important American contribution to the global financial system is perhaps the introduction of the Bretton Woods system. The Bretton Woods system of monetary management, created at a conference in 1944, established the rules for commercial and financial relations among the world’s major industrial states in the mid-20^th century. The Bretton Woods system was the first example of a fully negotiated monetary order intended to govern monetary relations among independent nation-states. Setting up a system of rules, institutions, and procedures to regulate the international monetary system, the planners at Bretton Woods established the IMF and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), which today is part of the World Bank Group.

Besides the influence of the U.S. on the Bretton Woods system, it is often claimed that the United States’s transition to neoliberalism and global capitalism also led to a change in the identity and functions of international financial institutions like the IMF. Because of the high involvement and voting power of the United States, the global economic ideology could effectively be transformed to match that of the U.S. This is consistent with the IMF’s function change during the 1970s after a change in President Nixon’s policies (when the Nixon Shock ended the Bretton Woods gold standard). Others also claim that, because of the disproportionate economic power of the United States, allies of the United States are able to receive bigger loans with fewer conditions.

18.5.4: Collective Military Force

A collective military force (when multiple countries pool their militaries) involves both collective security and collective defense.

Learning Objective

Compare and contrast the concepts of collective security and collective defense

Key Points

• Collective security is more far-reaching than collective defense as it addresses a broader range of threats.
• States usually establish an organization in order to pursue collective security. The UN is the most prominent example of a collective security organization.
• In collective defense (usually formalized by a treaty or an organization) states agree to come to the defense of another state; an attack on one state is considered an attack on all.
• The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is one of the most prominent collective defense organizations. The US is a prominent and leading member of NATO.
• The 1991 Gulf War is an example of states successfully creating and deploying a collective military force.

Key Terms

collective defense

An arrangement, usually formalized by a treaty and an organization, among participant states that commit support in defense of a member state if it is attacked by another state outside the organization.

collective security

The concept of maintaining peace among all nations or members of a group by making the security concerns of one member important to all members. This is broader than mere military alliances; a primary example of collective security is the UN.

North Atlantic Treaty Organization

An intergovernmental military alliance based on the North Atlantic Treaty which was signed on 4 April 1949. The organization constitutes a system of collective defense whereby its member states agree to mutual defense in response to an attack by any external party.

Collective Military Force

A collective military force is what arises when countries decide that it is in their best interest to pool their militaries in order to achieve a common goal. The use of collective military force in the global environment involves two primary concepts: collective security and collective defense. These concepts are similar but not identical.

Collective Security

Collective security can be understood as a security arrangement, regional or global, in which each state in the system accepts that the security of one is the concern of all, and agrees to join in a collective response to threats to, and breaches of, the peace. Collective security is more ambitious than collective defense in that it seeks to encompass the totality of states within a region or indeed globally, and to address a wide range of possible threats.

Collective security is achieved by setting up an international cooperative organization, under the auspices of international law. This gives rise to a form of international collective governance, albeit limited in scope and effectiveness. The collective security organization then becomes an arena for diplomacy.

The UN and Collective Security

The UN is often provided as the primary example of collective security. By employing a system of collective security, the UN hopes to dissuade any member state from acting in a manner likely to threaten peace, thereby avoiding any conflict.

Collective Defense

Collective defense is an arrangement, usually formalized by a treaty and an organization, among participant states that commit support in defense of a member state if it is attacked by another state outside the organization .

NATO and Collective Defense

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is the best known collective defense organization . Its now famous Article V calls on (but does not fully commit) member states to assist another member under attack. This article was invoked after the September 11 attacks on the United States, after which other NATO members provided assistance to the US War on Terror in Afghanistan . As a global military and economic superpower, the US has taken charge of leading many of NATO’s initiatives and interventions.

NATO in Afghanistan

In 2003, NATO took command of ISAF (International Security Assistance Force), which was the group of international troops operating in Afghanistan. This picture depicts a commander passing the NATO flag during a change of command in Afghanistan.

September 11 and Collective Defense

The 11 September attacks in the United States caused NATO to invoke its collective defense article for the first time.

NATO Coverage

This map depicts current members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, one of the primary examples of a collective defense organization.

Benefits and Drawbacks to Collective Defense

Collective defense entails benefits as well as risks. On the one hand, by combining and pooling resources, it can reduce any single state’s cost of providing fully for its security. Smaller members of NATO, for example, have leeway to invest a greater proportion of their budget on non-military priorities, such as education or health, since they can count on other members to come to their defense, if needed.

On the other hand, collective defense also involves risky commitments. Member states can become embroiled in costly wars in which neither the direct victim nor the aggressor benefit. In the First World War, countries in the collective defense arrangement known as the Triple Entente (France, Britain, Russia) were pulled into war quickly when Russia started full mobilization against Austria-Hungary, whose ally Germany subsequently declared war on Russia.

Using Collective Military Force: The 1991 Gulf War

The Gulf War (2 August 1990 – 28 February 1991), codenamed Operation Desert Storm, was a war waged by a UN-authorized coalition force from 34 nations led by the United States, against Iraq in response to Iraq’s invasion and annexation of Kuwait. This invasion is often given as an example of the successful deployment of a collective military force.

In August, 1990, Iraqi troops invaded Kuwait. This invasion met with unified international condemnation, and brought immediate economic sanctions against Iraq by members of the UN Security Council. U.S. President George H. W. Bush deployed American forces into Saudi Arabia, and an array of nations joined the coalition. In this conflict, the UN, the US, and other nations were united into a military force that successfully propelled the Iraqi aggressor out of sovereign Kuwait.

18.5.5: Economic Aid and Sanctions

States can give economic aid to help another country, or implement economic sanctions to try and force another country to change policies.

Learning Objective

Analyze criticisms of the institutions, practices and policies of economic aid

Key Points

• Economic aid is given, at least partly, with the motivation of helping the recipient country. Aid can also be a tool of foreign policy given to show diplomatic approval, reward a government, or gain some other benefit.
• Economic aid is often given with conditions, meaning that in order to receive the aid, the recipient country must change economic policies, agree to spend the aid only on certain items, etc.
• Economic aid is often criticized for being motivated more by donor concerns than recipient concerns, for being a form of neocolonialism, and for simply not being effective.
• Economic sanctions are a foreign policy tool in which one country places trade penalties on another country, and may include trade barriers, duties, or quotas.
• Economic sanctions can be put in place as a foreign policy measure designed to make another country change some sort of human rights or political policy (for example, the US has sanctions against Iran).
• One country can declare sanctions against another country in protest of unfair trading practices.

Key Terms

conditionality

A condition applied to the access of a government to credit facilities and other international financial assistance, especially from the IMF and the World Bank.

neocolonialism

The control or domination by a powerful country over weaker ones (especially former colonies) by the use of economic pressure, political suppression and cultural dominance.

sanction

A penalty, or some coercive measure, intended to ensure compliance; especially one adopted by several nations, or by an international body.

Economic Aid and Sanctions

As part of foreign policy, states can use money and monetary policies to either help or penalize other states. Economic aid is a voluntary transfer of resources from one country to another, given at least partly with the objective of benefiting the recipient country . Sanctions, on the other hand, are penalties (usually in the form of trade policies) that are applied to one country by another.

Development Aid

States can give economic aid to help another country’s economic development. In this picture, the US government has supplied water pumps to a village in Afghanistan.

Economic Aid

Aid may have other functions besides humanitarian: it may be given to signal diplomatic approval, strengthen a military ally, reward a government for behavior desired by the donor, extend the donor’s cultural influence, provide infrastructure needed by the donor for resource extraction from the recipient country, or gain other kinds of commercial access. The threat of withdrawing aid can be another means by which a state can pursue its national interest. Humanitarianism and altruism are, nevertheless, significant motivations for the giving of aid.

A major proportion of aid from donor nations is based on conditionality, meaning that the aid comes with conditions. For example, some donors mandate that a receiving nation must spend the aid on products and expertise originating only from the donor country. Similarly, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, as primary holders of developing countries’ debt, attach structural adjustment conditionalities to loans which generally include eliminating state subsidies and the privatizing state services.

Criticisms of Economic Aid

Aid is seldom given from motives of pure altruism; instead, it is often used as a tool of foreign policy. It may be given as a means of supporting an ally in international politics. It may also be given with the intention of influencing the political process in the receiving nation. Aid to underdeveloped countries is often more in the interest of the donor than the recipient, or even a form of neocolonialism. In recent decades, aid by organizations such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank has been criticized as being primarily a tool used to open new areas up to global capitalists, and being only secondarily, if at all, concerned with the well-being of the people in the recipient countries.

Economic aid is often criticized for simply not being effective: it does not do what it was intended to do or help the people it was intended to help. Statistical studies have produced widely differing assessments of the correlation between aid and economic growth, and no firm consensus has emerged to suggest that foreign aid boosts growth. It has also been argued that foreign aid harms recipient governments, often because aid distributed by local politicians finances the creation of corrupt government.

Economic Sanctions: Resolving Trade Disputes

Economic sanctions are domestic penalties applied by one country or group of countries on another for a variety of reasons. Economic sanctions include, but are not limited to, tariffs, trade barriers, import duties, and import or export quotas.

Sanctions can arise from an unresolved trade or policy dispute, such as a disagreement about the fairness of a policy affecting international trade. For instance, one country may conclude that another is unfairly subsidizing exports of one or more products, or unfairly protecting some sector from competition from imported goods or services. The first country may retaliate by imposing import duties on goods or services from the second.

For example, in March 2010, Brazil introduced new sanctions against the US. These sanctions were on the basis that the US government was paying cotton farmers for their products, an action not allowed by the WTO. The WTO is currently supervising talks between the states to remove the sanctions.

Economic Sanctions: Achieving Policy Goals

Economic sanctions also can be a coercive foreign policy measure used to achieve particular policy goals related to trade, governance, or humanitarian violations. For example, the United States has imposed economic sanctions against Iran for years on the basis that the Iranian government sponsors groups who work against US interests . The United Nations imposed stringent economic sanctions on Iraq after the first Gulf War, partly as an attempt to make the Iraqi government cooperate with the UN weapons inspectors’ monitoring of Iraq’s weapons programs.

Iran and Sanctions

The US has long upheld economic sanctions against Iran, arguing that Iran pursues policies that are contrary to US national interest.

18.5.6: Arbitration

Arbitration is a form of dispute resolution that can be used to resolve international commercial, investment, and interstate conflicts.

Learning Objective

Explain the advantages of international commercial and investment arbitration

Key Points

• Arbitration is a form of alternative dispute resolution in which a third party reviews evidence in a dispute and makes a decision that is legally binding for all involved.
• International arbitration has frequently been used in resolving international commercial or investment disputes.
• International commercial and investment arbitration is popular primarily because it avoids the uncertainties and problems that come with litigating in a foreign, national court, and arbitration is confidential and enforceable.
• The main legal instrument that governs international commercial arbitration is the 1958 New York Convention, which was created under the auspices of the UN and has been signed by more than 140 countries.
• Arbitration can also be an important tool of foreign policy, as it provides a way for states to resolve their conflicts peaceably. For example, in 1903, arbitration settled a border dispute between the United States and Canada.

Key Terms

New York Convention

Widely considered the foundational instrument for international arbitration, this agreement requires the courts of states who signed the agreement to give effect to private arbitration agreements and to recognize and enforce arbitration awards made in other contracting states.

alternative dispute resolution

Resolution of a dispute through negotiation, mediation, arbitration, or similar means, as opposed to litigation

arbitration

A process through which two or more parties use an arbitrator or arbiter (an impartial third party) in order to resolve a dispute.

What is Arbitration?

Arbitration, a form of alternative dispute resolution, is a legal technique for the resolution of disputes outside the courts, where the parties to a dispute refer it to one or more persons by whose decision they agree to be bound. It is a resolution technique in which a third party reviews the evidence in the case and imposes a decision that is legally binding for both sides and enforceable.

Arbitration is often used for the resolution of commercial disputes, particularly in the context of international commercial transactions. Arbitration can be an important tool of foreign policy, as it allows states a forum to resolve disputes.

International Arbitration

International arbitration is a leading method for resolving disputes arising from international commercial agreements and other international relationships. As with arbitration generally, international arbitration is a creature of contract. In other words, the parties’ agree to submit disputes to binding resolution by arbitrators, usually by including a provision for the arbitration of future disputes in their contract. The practice of international arbitration has developed so as to allow parties from different legal and cultural backgrounds to resolve their disputes, generally without the formalities of their respective legal systems.

Advantages to International Arbitration

International arbitration has enjoyed growing popularity with business and other users over the past 50 years. There are a number of reasons that parties elect to have their international disputes resolved through arbitration. These include: the desire to avoid the uncertainties and local practices associated with litigation in national courts, the desire to obtain a quicker, more efficient decision, the relative enforceability of arbitration agreements and awards, the commercial expertise of arbitrators, the parties’ freedom to select and design the arbitral procedures, confidentiality of arbitration, and other benefits.

The New York Convention

The principal instrument governing the enforcement of commercial international arbitration agreements and awards is the United Nations Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958 (the “New York Convention”). The New York Convention was drafted under the auspices of the United Nations and has been ratified by more than 140 countries, including most major countries involved in significant international trade and economic transactions . The New York Convention requires that the states that have ratified it to recognize and enforce international arbitration agreements and foreign arbitral awards issued in other contracting states, subject to certain limited exceptions. These provisions of the New York Convention, together with the large number of contracting states, has created an international legal regime that significantly favors the enforcement of international arbitration agreements and awards.

New York Convention Signatories

This map depicts all of the countries who have signed on to the New York Convention. This extensive treaty is often recognized as the most important instrument governing international commercial arbitration.

International Commercial and Investment Arbitration

The resolution of disputes under international commercial contracts is widely conducted under the auspices of several major international institutions and rule making bodies. Specialist dispute resolution bodies also exist, such as the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), which has an arbitration and mediation center and a panel of international neutrals specializing in intellectual property and technology related disputes.

The last few decades have seen the promulgation of numerous investment treaties such as the Energy Charter Treaty, which are designed to encourage investment in signatory countries by offering protections to investors from other signatory states.

Interstate Arbitration

Arbitration has been used for centuries for the resolution of disputes between states and state-like entities. The 1899 and 1907 Hague Conferences addressed arbitration as a mechanism for resolving state-to-state disputes, leading to the adoption of the Hague Conventions for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes. The Conventions established the Permanent Court of Arbitration and a rudimentary institutional framework for international arbitration of inter-state disputes .

Members of the Permanent Court of Arbitration

These states are parties to the Permanent Court of Arbitration (the green states signed on to the 1907 agreement and the blue ones to the 1899 agreement).

For example, in 1903, arbitration resolved a dispute over the Canada-Alaska border. The Alaska Purchase of 1867 drew the boundary between Canada and Alaska in ambiguous fashion. With the gold rush into the Yukon in 1898, miners had to enter through Alaska and Canada wanted the boundary redrawn to obtain its own port. The issue went to arbitration and the Alaska boundary dispute was resolved in US favor by an arbitration in 1903 . In recent years, international arbitration has been used to resolve a number of disputes between states or state-like entities, thus making arbitration an important tool in modern foreign policy.

Alaska Boundary Dispute

Blue is the border as was claimed by the United States, red is the border as was claimed by Canada. The Canadian province of British Columbia claimed a greater area, shown in green. Yellow shows the current border, after the boundary dispute was resolved by arbitration in 1903. Arbitration can be an important tool in solving interstate disputes.