Big Stick Policy During The 20th Century

706 Words2 Pages

The United States has endured numerous policies about the strategies in which our country should handle foreign nations. The 20th century gave rise to many opinions regarding America’s stance in relation to other countries: either remain isolationists or become imperialistic. During the time period in which imperialistic views emerged, meeting any challenge to America’s interests overseas was put into effect through the influence of Theodore Roosevelt. It called for working as patiently and peacefully as possible in order to achieve goals. It limited the use of force, though required it only when necessary. It was an ideal balance between staying neutral yet establishing an authoritative presence in the world. With that said, the Big Stick …show more content…

America wanted to build a canal that would allow ships to navigate through Central America, benefiting the U.S. economically. However, the French and Colombian companies that provided materials for construction raised their prices knowing that the U.S. had much interest in it. Peaceful negotiations with the French and Colombians were attempted at first but quickly proved ineffective. Instead of responding with military force, the United States orchestrated a “revolution” that would encourage Panama to break away from Colombia. Their efforts succeeded and Panama— guaranteed money and independence from the U.S.— eventually allowed America permanent access to the Panama Canal. This example demonstrates the effectiveness of the Roosevelt Corollary because the U.S. initially sought for a peaceful agreement; but when it was clear an agreement could not be made, the implementation of naval force to secure the Panama Canal became necessary. As expected with any action that required force, there was controversy over whether the U.S. handled the situation in the best way possible. However, America’s benefit of the construction and control over the Panama Canal proved to outweigh any negative effects that came with …show more content…

held under the Big Stick Policy was “international police power” which had the purpose of preserving peace and order in the world— ultimately protecting American interests. One example that corroborates why Roosevelt’s strategy was the best approach to foreign policy was because of its ability to bring peace to foreign regions like Japan and Russia. These two rival nations were involved in an over-year long war (known as the the Russo-Japan War) over commercial control in Korea and China. Knowing that American business in China would be risked no matter the outcome, Roosevelt exercised international police power by offering to mediate the conflict between Japan and Russia. Weeks of negotiations finally led to a conclusion of the war, and for that, Theodore Roosevelt received a Nobel Peace Prize. Although many can argue that Roosevelt himself was the reason for reduced tensions between Russia and Japan, it is certain that he would not have been able to succeed without the use of “international police power”. Similarly, Roosevelt was able to mediate a conflict between France and Great Britain, and Germany over affairs in Morocco. He achieved the primary goal of protecting U.S. interests by averting a European war to ultimately prevent a disturbance to American trade. Without international police power in both these situations— or the the Big Stick Policy for that matter— the United States would not have been able to step in and resolve the many

Open Document