Chapter 18 Foreign Policy

American Foreign Policy Goal No. 1: Security The first goal of American foreign policy is security. Two leading foreign-policy views, realism and liberalism, differ sharply on how best to ensure security for Americans and allied countries. To pursue security, the United States deploys a large military and maintains a policy of primacy—the idea that no military power should rival ours. Liberal thinkers prefer diplomacy and other forms of multi-national cooperation, soft (or cultural) power, and foreign aid.

American Foreign Policy Goal No. 2: Prosperity A second primary goal of foreign policy is to protect prosperity. Economic strength is the ultimate source of power on the world stage. Today, the U.S. economy is the largest in the world—but many Americans and allies around the globe wonder: Will the United States maintain its economic strength relative to other nations? American economic policy has been guided by the pursuit of free trade— the removal of barriers to international commerce. Resistance has grown to free trade, especially among congressional Democrats. Many support fair trade. International economic policy also focuses on protecting energy sources and using economic sticks and carrots to influence the behavior of other nations.

Foreign Policy Goal No. 3: Spreading American Ideals The United States tries to spread its own values of democracy and freedom—sometimes creating goodwill, at other times a backlash. This is a rare goal for a nation’s foreign policy. After a decline in popularity in the 2000s, many nations now see the United States in a more positive light. Critics argue that the United States simply uses the language of values to pursue its self-interest. They see even the nation’s talk of liberty as little more than a cover for unbridled capitalism and inequality.

Foreign Policy Perspectives Three decisions guide foreign policy: First, policymakers must choose between strategic engagement (only get involved in a global conflict or alliance when it clearly advances the U.S. national interest) or internationalism (engagement with the world). Second, policymakers must choose whether to act unilaterally (go it alone) or multilaterally (in alliance with other nations). Third, policymakers put it all together with an overall perspective: Wilsonians focus on values, Hamiltonians on economics, Jeffersonians on democracy at home, and Jacksonians on defending American security and well-being.

Who Makes Foreign Policy? Although we often talk about nations as if they had a single interest, many different individuals and institutions shape foreign policy. Congress and the presidents were originally foreign policy partners. During the Cold War, the checks and balances diminished. Today, the president takes the lead and Congress offers a check. The most important executive agencies in foreign policy–making are the State Department, the Defense Department, and the National Security Council. Other important foreign policy influences include intelligence agencies like the CIA, economic bureaus like the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, interest groups, corporations, foreign governments, the media, and the public. The key question about American foreign policy: Is the messy, fragmented system swirling around the president an effective way to generate new ideas? Or is it too chaotic for the twenty-first century? Or both?

Adding All of It Up: Grand Strategies in US history The United States forged four grand strategies in the twentieth century: It stood alone and acted unilaterally (1918–1939), it led the democratic nations in multilateral coalitions during the Cold War (1945–1991), it debated a new world order after the Cold War (1991–2001), and it launched a war on terror (2001–present). The Obama administration called for a move away from the war on terror but found that difficult to do. Obama’s White House had scaled back many of the Bush administration policies (forbidding torture, overseeing extraordinary rendition, quietly dropping the phrase “war on terror” itself); nevertheless, it has kept the basic institutional framework of the war on terror in place.