America was a target of terrorism on September 11, 2001, and will continue to be a target of terrorism because it bears a significant degree of responsibility for generating the political, religious, and economic causes of terrorism. As a global superpower and the dominant economic power in the world, the United States has pursued policies which have embittered millions of people throughout the Middle East and the Third World, and one of the consequences of these policies was 9/11. According to Gunaratna (2003) bitterness in the Arab world about Western military and economic dominance, chronic tensions with Israel, and the rise of fundamentalist Islam combined during the last three decades of the twentieth century to foster an ideology of terrorism, especially in the turbulent Middle East. This bitterness has motivated Islamic extremists to target both Israel and the United States for terrorist attacks. Motivated by perceptions of victimization, encouraged by religious fanatics, and trained in Osama bin Laden’s terrorist camps, nineteen Muslims hijacked American airliners and attacked New York City and Washington D.C. on September 11, 2001. The 9/11 attacks demonstrated that the United States was vulnerable to foreign attack despite its global military power, and was a profoundly disturbing experience for all Americans. In order to understand why America was attacked on 9/11, it is necessary to examine the broader issue of Israeli/Arab enmity in the Middle East, for violence between Israelis and Muslims is just one consequence of this historical enmity, which has triggered four Arab/Israeli wars and a multitude of other violent military confrontations, such as the Israeli invasion and occupation of southern Lebanon twenty years ago and the recent fighting in Lebanon between Hezbollah and the Israeli army. Gunaratna (2003) notes that conflict with Israel has been perpetuated by Muslim extremist groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and the PLO, who have incited hatred of Israel and relentlessly make “the Zionists” the scapegoats for the suffering and misery of poverty-stricken Muslims throughout the region. They deny Israel’s right to exist and have vowed to destroy the Jewish state. But it is not only terrorists who have vowed this, for the destruction of Israel has been the stated goal of many Arab governments ever since Israel’s founding as a nation in 1948. In response to this long-term threat to Israel, the United States has provided significant military, economic, and political support to Israel for more than forty years, which has incited hostility towards the United States throughout the Arab world. American military, economic, and diplomatic support for Israel was one of the primary reasons for the 9/11 attacks, and as long as the United States continues to support Israel, it will be a target for Muslim terrorism.
For decades, American presidents have been concerned about tensions and instability in the Middle East, and have successfully established peaceful relations between Israel and Muslim states such as Egypt and Jordan. But since 2001, American foreign policy has been formulated in accordance with neo-con ideology, which advocates the aggressive use of American power in the world, especially in the Middle East. These misguided policies, combined with the incompetent manner in which they have been implemented, have produced disastrous consequences. In outlining what they perceive as the fundamental problem of terrorist motivations, critics of President Bush have argued that current war against terrorism methods have failed to address the multiple ideological and religious issues that motivate terrorists. According to Ehrenfield (2003) their argument has much merit, for one of the primary causes of terrorism is the dominance of American power and influence in the Middle...
The United States military occupation in the Middle East, or the “War on Terror” as it is sometimes called, is one of the most hotly debated subjects to date. The attacks on the World Trade Center and Washington, D.C. on September 11, 2001, along with the history of Saddam Hussein, created an extremely difficult situation for President George Bush and the rest of the government. The United States was not a stranger to war in the Middle East; in the early 90’s, the United States was fighting the Gulf War in the Middle East.
The attacks on 9/11 were committed by Al Qaeda, as Islamic terrorist organization based in the Middle East. The attacks consisted of four commercial planes being hijacked by suicide terrorists, and deliberately being flown into buildings. Two planes hit the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan, and those buildings subsequently collapsed within two hours. The other two planes were aimed at the Pentagon and Capitol Building in Washington D.C. The former reached its target, obliterating a portion of the building. The latter, however, was brought down over Pennsylvania, due to the passengers of the plane attempting to regain control from the terrorists. Osama bin Laden, who was thought to be the leader of Al Qaeda, did not claim credit for the attacks until 2004. Saddam Hussein, President of Iraq, was one of the only leaders in the world to praise the 9/11 attacks.
The question whether or not going to war...
...and mental state of decision-makers impose themselves onto the foreignpolicy of states and how is this explained by our study of ForeignPolicy
Word Count: 3,071
INR 6415: ForeignPolicy Analysis
Dr. James D. Boys
5th November 2013
The aim of this essay is to analyse three individuals who have all shaped foreignpolicy in their own, very distinct ways; Tony Blair, Margaret Thatcher and Henry Kissinger. Firstly, this paper will discuss the state of mind of Tony Blair throughout his premiership and just before he won leadership of the Labour Party. As well as this, the concept of Blair’s ‘Messianic’ complex will also be analysed to discover the degree to which that affected any, if not all, of his foreignpolicy decisions. Secondly, this paper will discuss the way in which Margaret Thatcher’s unique position affected her decisions with specific focus on the Falklands invasion and her motives for not allowing the island to fall. Thirdly, this paper will discuss the ways in which Henry Kissinger carried out his role as NSA advisor, and later Secretary of State, under the Nixon administration. There will be a specific analysis of Kissinger’s thought process and they ways in which this would have had an impact on the way in which he worked. The question of whether Kissinger was...
Should the U.S. Be Involved in Foreign Affairs?
“Overgrown military establishments are, under any form of government, inauspicious to liberty, and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty.” George Washington, having just fought against militaristic tyranny, knew well the dangers it posed. Over the past century, the United States has used its increasingly powerful military industrial complex to enforce its political opinions, and policies upon the peoples of the world. For the American people, war has become an everyday occurrence. We talk about people dying as if they were bad weather. The United States must remove itself from foreign conflicts before it becomes the next Nazi Germany.
The first step of US military domination occurred at the beginning of the twentieth century in the Philippines. The US was going to annex the Philippines as a result of the Spanish-American War; however, the Filipinos wanted independence, so they resisted the annexation. War erupted as Filipino forces, led by Emilio Aguinaldo, clashed with the US at the Battle of Manilla in 1899. Shortly after the war began, Aguinaldo sent a plea to General Otis, leader of the US forces, to end the fighting. Otis declined stating, “fighting, having begun, must go on to a grim end (Wikipedia, 1).” Otis also suppressed news leaks of American tactics, having...
* Foreignpolicy involves agenda setting, formulation, adoption, implementation, and evaluation
* President uses diplomacy, military aid, and military force to conduct foreignpolicy
* Military force: stronger states pressuring weaker states to get what they want
* Deterrence: the buildup of military force as a threat to warn another state not to pursue action
* Americanforeignpolicy involves:
* Nuclear proliferation
* Free trade
* Environmental issues
* Isolationism and non-interventionism
Not intervening in Rwanda, Darfur and the Sudan
Intervening in WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Kosvo conflicts
* Germanys submarine warfare provoked the USA to stop being neutral in WWI
* Attacked against centrals powers,
* First US deterrence from the isolationist foundation it had been built on
* It was good to stay away from European affairs. For Americans (and to some extent some Canadians), there was no incentive to play soldier half way across the world. Why should they care about Germany? They did not see the threats that Allies saw in 1913.
* WWII – in 1940 USA became less isolationism
* Americans were generally against declaring war until the Pearl...
As we approach the next Presidential election the topic of Americanforeignpolicy is once again in the spotlight. In this paper, I will examine four major objectives of U.S. foreignpolicy that have persisted throughout the twentieth century and will discuss the effect of each on our nation’s recent history, with particular focus on key leaders who espoused each objective at various times. In addition, I will relate the effects of Americanforeignpolicy objectives, with special attention to their impact on the American middle class. Most importantly, this paper will discuss America’s involvement in WWI, WWII, and the Cold War to the anticipated fulfillment of these objectives—democracy, manifest destiny, humanitarianism, and economic expansion.
To understand the United States’ involvement in these wars, we must first be aware of the role each of these policies plays within our nation and the importance of these four objectives to the American people. Democracy, which is the classic liberal political tradition, ensures the right of the people to determine their own government and is the foundation upon which our nation was founded. Manifest Destiny is defined as the responsibility to work to living in social harmony, or the belief that the U.S....
The four competing visions of US grand strategy are offshore balancing, selective engagement, cooperative security and preponderance. Each strategy has its own unique features that determine the nation’s essential objectives in the international world of politics and the means on how to achieve those objectives.
First off, the essential characteristics of offshore balancing includes the “America first” mentality; the belief that meddling too much in international affairs can be counterproductive. In addition, offshore balancing proponents also tend to disengage from overseas alliances/peacetime commitments; adopting an “intervention only if necessary” attitude in the international arena. In terms of economics, it discourages interdependence among states because US economic security can be jeopardized by events such as “balance of trade deficits”(excess imports over exports). Essentially, it is a form of barebones, defensive realism that places its regional priorities exclusively in North America. Offshore balancing is the least ambitious grand strategy due to the fact that the only vital US interest lies in the security of the American people, ideals and assets. Critics state the fact that offshore balancing “embraces a constricted view of U.S. national interests that renders internationalism not only unnecessary but counterproductive.” The belief that disengagement brings...
...The purpose of Americanforeignpolicy, theoretically, is to create a more secure, democratic, and prosperous world for the benefit of the American people and the global community. Throughout history individuals could argue whether this has necessarily been the case. Have political representatives elected by the people, for the people, used their political connections and influences in the best interests of United States citizens?
In 1895 the Cuban revolution in Spain began. The United States media used newspapers to portray the excessive suffering that Cubans were enduring under the control of the Spaniards. The media also depicted President McKinley as a coward for not intervening to assist the Cubans. (Module 22: War with Spain) The intriguing question is would President McKinley have declared war on the Spanish if the explosion of the USS Maine had not occurred? It is my opinion that the President used this incident as a reason to declare war. In April 1898 the United States declared war on the Spaniards. Thus began, the “splendid little war” as defined by Teddy Roosevelt (in later years) which ended with a United States victory against the Spaniards which Cubans thought would help them gain their independence.
Another event in American history that happened due to political concern over foreignpolicy was World War I (WWI). The United States initially...
...looks to the United States, both in the past and present, and its international presence, one common theme constantly pops up. Whenever the flag moves beyond the borders of the country, there always is a democratic or humans rights or peace reason for doing so. Regardless of the actual motives of the government and the American people, to us and the rest of the world, the United States has become the beacon for freedom and equality for all. After all, isn’t that whatAmericans strive to be? All of the propaganda associated with the United States, particularly the American Dream, is based on this idea of everyone has an equal opportunity. It only seems fitting that the people of America try to spread this ideology on a global front. However, while the word of the leaders of this country may ring loud and clear, do their actions and involvement at a global level actually reflect the ideas held so dear by the American people? The lack of transparency has clouded people from making an accurate analysis regarding America’s entrance and escalation on the international stage. During the early 1900s, and even looking to the present day, on balance has the rise of American as an empire or hegemon been working for the global good? Looking at this idea in purely black and white terms, sure. US involvement during the late 1800s and early 1900s, including the liberation of Spanish colonies such as Cuba and the...