Conflicting Approaches to American Foreign Policy

In the 1940s and 1950s, George Frost Kennan, Reinhold Niebuhr, and William Appleman Williams presented differing assessments of the effectiveness of American foreign policy as it was applied, as well as differing contentions as to how it should be applied. The thought of these three individualspolitical theorist and policy maker in the case of Kennan, philosopher and theologian in the case of Niebuhr, and historian and insightful critic of the American political experience in the case of Williams, as that thought is relevant to the development and application of American foreign policy, is reviewed and critiqued in this paper.

The review and critique of the thought Kennan, Niebuhr, and Williams are based largely on three worksAmerican Diplomacy by Kennan, The Children of Light and the Children of Darkness by Niebuhr, and The Tragedy of American Diplomacy by Williams. With respect to each of these three men, however, the review and critique of their thought demand consideration of some of their other works. Thus, additional works by each of the three men are cited as appropriate to accurately define and assess their thought.

A great deal of chronological overlap existed in the professional lives of Kennan, Niebuhr, and Williams. Niebuhr's earliest work, however, predated that of Kennan, and Kennan's earliest work predated that of Williams. Thus, the review and critique in this paper begins with Nie

. . .
m, but he also wanted to avoid the ultimate war.20 Niebuhr proclaimed that he objected to the American penchant to dismiss as irrelevant and unimportant the positions and opinions of other nations when such positions and opinions differed from those of the United States.21 In his writings, however, he often displayed an ethnocentric perspective of his own. He contended, as an example, that "the world is being held together" by American power.22 In another instance, Niebuhr was able to equate the Soviet suppression of the Hungarian uprising in 1956 with the AngloFrench attack on Egypt over control of the Suez Canal, but, at the same time, was either unable or unwilling to recognize the similarity of the American position in Panama.23 Niebuhr was able to state that "the chief moral and political problem with which we have to contend is derived from the fact that we have a strong antiimperialist tradition and yet we are an imperial power . . .," but he did not feel compelled to specify American imperialism as he did in the instance of that of other nations.24 In yet another instance, he was able to  19Harland, 200201. 20Reinhold Niebuhr, "The Two Dimensions of the Struggle," Christianity and Crisis, 11, 28 May 195
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Scribner's Sons, Niebuhr Niebuhr, America Confronts, Appleman Williams, Soviet Union, United Williams, Europe Asia, University Press, Soviet Union, Christianity Crisis, foreign policy, american foreign, american foreign policy, niebuhr reinhold, america confronts, christianity crisis, american diplomacy, appleman williams, william appleman, york charles scribner's, scribner's sons, charles scribner's, charles scribner's sons, william appleman williams, boston little brown,
Approximate Word count = 3851
Approximate Pages = 15 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Conflicting Approaches to American Foreign Policy