The Politics and Policies of Three U.S President from the Post World War II - Essay Example

The Politics and Policies of Three U.S President from the Post World War II A country’s foreign policy refers to theset of goals which outline how a given country relates with other countries politically, economically, socially and in military terms. The term might also to a lesser extent refer to a countries interaction with other non-state actors. We can therefore state that foreign policy is primarily concerned with the interrelationship between the external environments outside a countries boarders and the domestic or internal environment which is influenced by various subnational sources. Through peaceful cooperation as a result of a countries foreign policies, a country is able to protect its national interest, economic prosperity and more importantly national security. The United States has for long experienced a split personality when it comes to matters regarding foreign policy. Other policies exemplify a pragmatic nation which requires that the nation respond to facts as they relate to the situation at hand and hence application of a rational decision making process to the problem (Brinkley 2011). On the other hand, we have an idealistic side which has for long gotten the United States into trouble. This is attributed to the loss of sight on the fact that the resources at our disposal are limited. Additionally, the resources which are in most cases are measured both in terms of financial, economic and military in addition to political will which must at all times match the objectives of the country so as to ensure success. Since the end of the Second World War, the country had been demobilizing and was also characterized with the public reverting to its traditional isolationist character (Brinkley 2011). This made containment only limited to where the military strength was greatest which was in Western Europe. The entrance of China into the Korean War on the 26th day of November 1950 resulted into a retreat by U.S. troops being below the thirty eighth parallel and consequently resulting into a stalemated war. It is in line with this that Eisenhower with a promise of ensuring the war in Korea is rapidly and successful conclusion was elected into office as president. Come the end of 1952, Eisenhower had already concluded that it was not prudent for the united states to needed to engage in a conventional war on the Asian mainland, a decision which we can trace to the fact that the cabinet was made up of businessmen who as a matter of fact were extreme fiscal conservatives who placed more emphasis on having a balanced budget (Brinkley 2011). Additionally, the present who had been a general understood the need to the resources of America and their foreign policy commitments. Amongst remarkable attributes that can be associated with him include the realistic approach to foreign issues and the ability to recognize the limits of the capabilities of the resources. Additionally, he ushered in a pragmatic foreign policy through redefinition and limitation of the goals of containment. He is best remembered for negotiating for a ceasefire agreement between the North and the south at thirty-eighth parallel on July 1953. He additionally redirected support for French efforts in Indochina and subsequently promising economic aid to the Diem government. We can also note that he relied more on other countries resources mainly acquired through alliances like the Baghdad Pact and the Southeast Asian Treaty Organization as tools for countering threats posed by communists (Brinkley 2011). It can however be noted that Eisenhower failed to offer the needed support to Hungarian Uprising with the main excuse being that he believed that the United States lacked the requisite military resources to challenge the Soviet Union especially when it is in its sphere of influence. Additionally, due to his administrations fiscal conservatism the size of the armed forces was significantly reduced and subsequent development of the strategic doctrine of the massive retaliation (Brinkley 2011). Certain key events during the later years of Eisenhower’s administration played a key role in providing the background for idealistic missionary foreign policies witnessed during the reigns of Presidents Kennedy and Johnson. During his inaugural address, the relatively young Kennedy set the tone for a changed foreign policy exemplified by his commitment to ensuring that the country will bear any burden, pay any price, meet any hardship, offer support to any friend, provide opposition to any foe in order to assure there is success of liberty (Brinkley 2011). The best that can be remembered of the administration is the embarrassment for the Kennedy decision makers is the Bay of Pigs fiasco and being helpless as regards to stopping the construction of the Berlin wall and expansion of the United States commitments in Indochina and the pledges to defend West Berlin from external attack and launching of the Alliance for progress in Latin America (Brinkley 2011). It is also during Kennedys time that under the then secretary of defense Robert McNamara’s strategic policy of flexible response experienced rapid expansion. Another sobering experience marking the reign is the Cuban missile crisis which we believe would have led to application of a more pragmatic approach to American foreign policy. The lessons learnt by President Johnson from the crisis is that through gradual escalation of threat and resolve of the country, the enemies of the United States give into the goals and interests of the united states. The beginning of 1964 was marked with the appraisal of very disturbing security situation which would play a significant role in either escalating the U.S. investment or collapsing the South Vietnam and the latter was totally unacceptable to Johnson. His reign driven by the concerns of threats of not being aggressive enough made him expand the countries resources, objectives and commitments in the Southeast Asia. Consequently, a half a million American soldiers had been committed to Vietnam by the end of his reign. Towards the end of his reign, there arose many factors which consequently limited the ability of the nation to exercise power hence laying the ground for a rise of more pragmatic and realistic foreign policies. Amongst these included the development of second strike nuclear capability by the Soviet Union, the overvalued dollar, the rising U.S. trade deficit, the war in Vietnam and most importantly the ever escalating social agenda back at home (Brinkley 2011). This later led to the enactment of an implied agreement guiding the conduct and sphere of influence which later gave permission to the United States to refocus and institute new priorities which would limit the U.S. foreign policy objectives hence maintaining a balance amongst major powers of the world. From the study it is evident that there has been a shift in the U.S. foreign policy and estimating the exact time within which a new shift is expected from the idealistic to pragmatic is difficult though the time does not look very far considering the evidence from the study. What is clear however, is that America must reconcile its goals within the context of the available resources. Works cited Brinkley, Alan. American History, A Survey, Volume Two, 14th Edition 2011. Read More