Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
American foreign policy since the cold war
American foreign policy since the cold war
American foreign policy since the cold war
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: American foreign policy since the cold war
American financial institutions such as the government, banks and nonprofit organizations have had a long history of giving economic aid to developing nations to prevent large-scale economic collapse and for reconstruction after disasters. This is especially the case after World War II and the Bretton Woods Conference, which was the foreground for what today is the World Bank. The United States has failed to improve nations at times when providing aid to other countries and regions, especially in regions such as Latin America. A prime example of this type of failure was the development and implementation of an economic aid system, named the Washington Consensus. Countries such as Argentina, Brazil and Mexico suffered greatly for many years because, “what had been sold in the early 1980s as a foolproof ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution was shown to be very uneven”(Dunkerly 2008 310). Flawed developmental policy such as this, created a terrible economic collapse for nearly all of Latin America, which is still changing policy to recover from the 1980s crisis today. Similarly, when Central and South America’s economy declined, US foreign policy also began to change to reflect the problems being caused between the two regions. Overall, this paper will define what the Washington Consensus is and how it affected American foreign policy concerning Latin America in areas such as developmental aid models, immigration and illegal drugs. By looking back at such failures we are able to change the way aid is distributed in a more positive and effective way.
During the late 1970s and early 1980s there was a shift in American political ideology when it came to the international market place, economic policy and providing aid to developing countries...
... middle of paper ...
...fairs. 10 (2), p245-256.
Loayza, N. & Raddatz, C. (2006). The Composition of Growth Matters for Poverty Alleviation. Available: http://econ.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/EXTRESEARCH/ XTPROGRAMS/EXTMACROECO/0,,contentMDK:21499207~menuPK:42634 7~pagePK:64168182~piPK:64168060~theSitePK:477872,00.html#Featured_Re earch. Last accessed June 8 2010.
Riesco, M. (2009). Latin America: a new developmental welfare state model in
the making? International Journal of Social Welfare. 18, pS22-S36.
Rochlin, J. (2007). Latin America’s Left Turn and the New Strategic Landscape: the case of Bolivia. Third World Quarterly. 28 (7), p1327 – 1342.
Rodrik, D. (2006). Goodbye Washington Consensus, Hello Washington Confusion?
A Review of the World Bank’s Economic Growth in the 1990s: Learning from a Decade of Reform. Journal of Economic Literature. 44, p973-987.
The presidencies of George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton both exemplify a desire to reshape world affairs after the ending of the Cold War in 1991 and the subsequent dissolution of the Soviet Union. Although the United States had unrivalled economic and power after the war, neither president sought to adopt the aggressive rhetoric of predecessor Ronald Reagan, as it was feared that this may impair relations with nations that the U.S. wanted to maintain. Both Bush and Clinton considered the fostering of positive relationships around the world hugely important on the basis that it was hoped former Soviet states in Europe and countries in East Asia would adopt a democratic political system and laissez-faire neoliberal economy much like the U.S., thereby ensuring the
With the 1960s and 1970s, came a growing need for change among the American people. A previously dominant liberal government was not taking a hard enough stance on the fight to end communism. All it took, was a final nudge to shift the vote from democratic to republican.
For the past century, the United States has been regarded as the greatest hegemonic power in the world. The U.S. played the most important role in the advancement of mankind from social, political, scientific, military, and economic standpoint. Unfortunately, today this is no longer true. Since the 1980’s the U.S. has been on a gradual decline. The introduction and implementation of trickle down economics, otherwise known as “Reaganomics,” has contributed greatly to the systemic dismantling of the socioeconomic structure that made America great.
98-176. 5 Robert H. Ferrell, America as a World Power, 1872-1945, (New York: Harper & Row Publishers Inc., 1971), p. 265. 6 Arthur Meier Schlesinger, p. 46. 7 Hamilton Fish, FDR: The Other Side of the Coin, (New York: Vantage Press 1976), pp.
In the late1960’s American politics were shifting at a National level with liberalism being less supported as its politics were perceived as flawed, both by people on the left who thought that liberalism was not as effective as more radical political enterprises and by conservatives who believed that liberal politics were ostensibly crippling the American economy.
Over the course of the history of the United States, specific foreign policies have affected the methods in which the U.S. involves itself around the globe. Specifically, certain policies have affected U.S. involvement in Latin America. It is the intention of this essay to explain the United States foreign policy behind specific doctrines. In order to realize current objectives, this paper will proceed as follows: Part 1 will define the Monroe Doctrine, Sections 2, 3, 4, and 5 will concurrently explicitly explain the Roosevelt Corollary, Good Neighbor Policy, and the Nixon Doctrine, discuss how each policy resulted in U.S. involvement in Latin American countries, describe how it was justified by the U.S. government, respectively, and finally, will bring this paper to a conclusion.
“In the wake of the Cold War, Americans felt it was their patriotic duty to buy consumer goods to help the economy grow. In turn, the U.S. became the world’s dominant economic power” ("Cold War Influences on American Culture, Politics, and Economics").
The Soviet Union and Eastern Europe became the East nations, and the United States, centered on NATO formed the West nations, dividing the world in two. Belonging to neither the East nor the West, developing countries were called Third World nations and became a stand-in for wars between the East and West (Gaddis, The Strategies of Containment 70-78). The end of WWII and the beginning of the C... ... middle of paper ... ... a, from containment to rollback in Korea; welcoming European integration because it portended the creation of an economic unit that encouraged technological innovation; building a configuration of power in the international system, nurturing free markets while safeguarding American interests, a constant in Washington for more than 35 years; and, free political economy at home were just a few of the strategic methods used to change, influence, and shape American domestic policy (Leffler, The Specter of Communism,100-129).
The Alliance for Progress program was initially met with open arms by most Latin Americans leaders and immediately boosted U.S. relations throughout the hemisphere.1 The alliance’s charter was signed by all members of the organization except for Cuba at a special meeting at Punta del Este, Uruguay, on August 17, 1961.2 The drafters of the charter emphasized that the twin goals of economic development and social injustice should be pursued simultaneously and that both should be paralleled by efforts to expand political freedom in the hemisphere. One of the most important factors of the program was the promotion of self-help. Under the alliance’s charter, the participating Latin American countries would provide eighty percent of the funding and the remaining twenty would be pledged by external sources, which would be furnished by the United states, other wealthy countries, and a variety of public and private groups. Though created to ensure the improvement of Latin America, there were many dilemmas within the Alliance for Progress. The program was not really an alliance and it did not progress satisfactorily.
The historian Ronn Pineo wrote “Beginning in the 1980s nearly all of Latin America began to take part in a great experiment, the adoption of capitalist free market economic policies.” (1) This great experiment began with the promotion of democracy and free market that promised a better future for Latin America. Neoliberalism, the economic ideology that promotes free-market capitalism, laid the foundation for many of the US military interventions and economic policies that caused a dramatic transformation of Latin America. This promise of a “democratic” government came from a policy initiative labeled as polyarchy. Polyarchy is “ a system in which a small group governs and mass participation in decision making is limited to choosing leaders in elections that are carefully managed by competing elites” (Lecture: Polyarchy and Resistance). It, however, was a sales pitch to continue Latin America’s subordinate position in to the global market. As a result, much of Latin America, by the late 1980 through the early 1990s, transitioned into this form of “democracy”. Consequently, Latin America suffered and still suffers today from underdevelopment, high levels of socioeconomic inequality, and immigration. Globalization of capital, off-shore production, and new technologies have created structural barriers and have
The power of the conservative movement was attributed to the mix of the frustration with failed economic and foreign policies and it was backed by a desire for a change in American culture that focused on the family. The Carter Administration was viewed as inept to lead because everything was going wrong in the American economy, the U.S. international reputation was being tarnished, and a lay minded person might have stated that Carter’s Administration was “circling the drain” at the time of his reelection. The conservative ascendancy in the late 1970s and early 1980s occurred because the people wanted a change and, as the Reagan campaign put it, they wanted to “make America great again.”
As the Latin American nations set out to construct a new government and society in the 1800´s, two opposing models aroused regarding which one would best benefit the countries. ¨Civilization vs. Barbarism¨ by Domingo Sarmiento, a recognized Argentinean revolutionary, contrasts Jose Marti´s ¨Our America¨ ideology which critiques U.S. capitalism and focuses on developing a good government based on the needs of the nations and each nation´s autochthony. Contrastingly, Sarmiento, guided by his beliefs in democratic principles, declares his preference towards the European urbanized way of life as the key to progress and stability for the nations. Despite the differences in the models proposed by Marti and Sarmiento for the New Nations to follow,
However, this does not necessarily mean colonizing Latin America, but rather having it allied and influenced by the United States' mentality and agenda. The book describes the tactics used by the United States to align these countries' policies and politics with its own. The book effectively portrays the role of the United States in the political affairs of Latin American countries. Higgins examines the Eisenhower administration's invasion of Guatemala, which resulted in a revolt to remove the leftist President Jacobo Arbenz Guzmán. The Arbenz administration posed a threat to the dominance of American companies in Guatemala, particularly the United Fruit Company.
Kegley, Charles W., and Eugene R. Wittkopf. World Politics Trend and Transformation. New York: St. Martin's, 1981. Print.
Whenever world politics is mentioned, the state that appears to be at the apex of affairs is the United States of America, although some will argue that it isn’t. It is paramount we know that the international system is shaped by certain defining events that has lead to some significant changes, particularly those connected with different chapters of violence. Certainly, the world wars of the twentieth century and the more recent war on terror must be included as defining moments. The warning of brute force on a potentially large scale also highlights the vigorousness of the cold war period, which dominated world politics within an interval of four decades. The practice of international relations (IR) was introduced out of a need to discuss the causes of war and the different conditions for calm in the wake of the first world war, and it is relevant we know that this has remained a crucial focus ever since. However, violence is not the only factor capable of causing interruption in the international system. Economic elements also have a remarkable impact. The great depression that happened in the 1920s, and the global financial crises of the contemporary period can be used as examples. Another concurrent problem concerns the environment, with the human climate being one among different number of important concerns for the continuing future of humankind and the planet in general.