Foreign Policy and Democrats
This is an excerpt from the paper...
The literature does not offer any support for the statement that, as a general rule, Democrats react too aggressively when conducting foreign policy because of a perceived distrust of their ability to handle national security issues. Arguably, the statement could be applied to the actions of Democratic presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson and their handling of the Cuban missile crisis and the Vietnam War, respectively. However, it could not be so easily applied to the actions of Harry Truman and Jimmy Carter during World War II and the period leading into the Cold War or during the various international crises of the late 1970s. Instead, one could argue that because of their perceived "hard-line" on foreign policy Republican presidents feel obligated to react aggressively. This argument could then be applied to Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George Bush in Indochina, Grenada, and Panama, respectively. It seems an overstatement to talk about George Bush's "handling" of the Cold War's end. Stephen Ambrose makes it clear that Bush did very little to deal with the momentous events occurring in the former Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc nations (362-66). Bush ordered very little economic aid or political support for the emerging nations. Instead, he continued to call for very high levels of defense expenditure and seemed to focus his attention on perceived enemies in the Middle East. The statement implies that a Democratic president would have felt
. . .
tent of the United States' contribution to and complicity in aggressive forces around the world. Nixon was deceptive about American commitment in Indochina when he realized that he lacked public support for the action (Gaddis 301). Ronald Reagan lied about American complicity in the arming of the Iran-Iraq war and the funding and arming of the Contras in Nicaragua (Ambrose 338-40). Thus, neither of these presidents offer support for the position that Republican presidents make any attempt to avoid the use of aggression as the statement seems to imply.
In the end, it appears that each president makes the decision on what is necessary force based on personal beliefs and character rather than strict adherence to political ideology. Often, each president acted in opposition to the desire of his party. Eisenhower followed a military policy that respected its effects on national domestic habits. Kennedy saw the public dissatisfaction with Eisenhower's policy and may have over-compensated by bringing the world almost to the brink of war. Nixon used aggression in Vietnam that exceeded adherence to containment to shape American's power. As did Reagan and Bush in Central America, the Caribbean and the Middle East.
Question #3
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Soviet Union, Cold War, Nicaragua Ambrose, Nixon Kissinger, United States', Iraqis Sandanistas, , Eastern Bloc, Hussein Iraqi, Kennedy President, soviet union, cold war, foreign policy, american foreign, united soviet union, united soviet, american foreign policy, fall soviet union, fall soviet, communist threat, central america, future american, future american foreign, struggle united soviet, struggle united,
Approximate Word count = 2117
Approximate Pages = 8 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Foreign Policy and Democrats
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
