2. American exceptionalism

Author(s):  
Daniel Deudney ◽  
Jeffrey Meiser

This chapter examines how America can be described as different and exceptional. The belief in American exceptionalism is based upon a number of core realities, including American military primacy, economic dynamism, and political diversity. Understanding understanding American exceptionalism is essential for understanding not only U.S. foreign policy but also major aspects of contemporary world politics. The chapter first considers the meaning of exceptionalism, the critics of American exceptionalism, and the roots of American success. It then discusses the liberalism that makes the United States exceptional, along with peculiar American identity formations of ethnicity, religion, and ‘race’. It also explores the role of American exceptionality across the five major epochs of American foreign policy, from the nation’s founding to the present. It concludes by reflecting on the significance of the election of Barack Obama as president in 2008 to the story of American exceptionalism, difference, and peculiar Americanism.

Author(s):  
Daniel Deudney ◽  
Jeffrey W. Meiser

This chapter argues why we must think of the United States as an exceptional kind of nation with a very distinct past and an equally distinct set of capabilities. It first considers American difference and exceptionality before discussing the meaning of exceptionalism, the critics of American exceptionalism, and the roots of American success. It then examines the liberalism that makes the United States exceptional, along with peculiar American identity formations of ethnicity, religion, and ‘race’ and how they interact with — and often subvert — American liberalism. It also analyses the role of American exceptionality across the five major epochs of US foreign policy, from the nation’s founding to the present day. Along the way, the chapter explores notions of American liberal republicanism, anti-statism, state-building, militarism, capitalism and prosperity, immigration, federal internationalism, unipolarity, war on terrorism, and unilateralism.


1990 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Garson

If there is a single event since the end of the Second World War that has seriously punctured America's sense of confident invulnerability it is, surely, not the withdrawal from Vietnam—that could always be explained away as a masterful reassessment of the nature of the communist threat—but the taking of American hostages by Islamic fundamentalists in Teheran in 1979. That event, more than any other, showed that America's faith in modernization, foreign aid, and a gradual injection of political liberalism as a means of drawing nations into the western orbit rested on brittle foundations. Until the Shah's overthrow Iran had seemed the perfect ally; despite the anti-libertarian blemishes of the Shah's regime, Iran had a prosperous middle class, a formidable standing in the region, a sound economy based on expensive oil, and was emerging from what was thought to be the constricting effect of Islam.


1993 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 223-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cathal J. Nolan

Nolan reviews three works describing the influence of ethics on modern international relations, namely Code of Peace: Ethics and Security in the World of the Warlord States (Dorothy V. Jones); The Age of Rights (Louis Henkin); and Morality and American Foreign Policy: The Role of Ethics in International Affairs (Robert W. McElroy). All present timely academic and historical arguments for existing opportunities to bring ethics into world politics. Jones and Henkin concern themselves most with moral principles involved in establishing international law and organizations, while McElroy discusses the same issues from the unique perspective of U.S. foreign policy. Nolan gives full recognition to the traditional role of democratic states, particularly the United States., in shaping the moral norms of the international system in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries through ethics that are Western in origin but certainly not in their inherent content.


Author(s):  
Gregorio Bettiza

The conclusion has two main objectives. The first is to show how the International Religious Freedom, Faith-Based Foreign Aid, Muslim and Islamic Interventions, and Religious Engagement regimes form a broader American foreign policy regime complex on religion. The second objective is to reflect on the book’s wider implications for the study of religion in international relations and highlight areas for further research. This includes assessing the strength of the book’s theoretical framework in light of ongoing developments under the Trump administration; understanding better the changes occurring to the religious traditions and actors that America draws from and intervenes in around the world; investigating further how the American experience with the operationalization of religion in foreign policy relates and compares to similar policy changes taking place elsewhere; and reflecting more broadly on the implications for international order of the growing systematic attempt by the United States to manage and mobilize religion in twenty-first-century world politics.


1981 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-28
Author(s):  
Hayward R. Alker

AbstractI write my comments on Von Laue's encomium to Stalin's "Tragic greatness" not as a specialist in Soviet affairs but as someone primarily concerned with humanizing the practice and possibilities of contemporary world politics. In reacting to his essay, first let me applaud Von Laue's effort to convey a "compassionate understanding" of Stalin's evil "greatness." Secondly, I shall comment critically on his standards for judging, or refraining from judging, Stalin's political greatness and moral responsibility. Thirdly, I shall address certain issues which these views raise when reapplied to the contemporary Soviet-American foreign policy context from which they originate.


1954 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 738-751 ◽  
Author(s):  
James W. Spain

On November 1, 1953 the Karachi correspondent of the New York Times filed a dispatch reporting that discussions of a military alliance between Pakistan and the United States were about to begin. On February 25,1954 President Eisenhower announced that the United States had decided to give military assistance to Pakistan for the purpose of “strengthening the defensive capabilities of the Middle East.” With the President's statement a new and powerful force entered the international politics of South Asia and another landmark of American foreign policy was set up. In the four months which intervened between the newspaper report and the official announcement, most of the important trends and issues in contemporary world politics had touched on or been touched by the U. S.-Pakistan proposal. Internal and external affairs of a dozen countries were affected. Most of the instruments of diplomacy and propaganda were employed to support or oppose agreement. Of primary importance to the United States was the clear and specific implementation of our established policy of supporting regional alliances of free nations to “contain” Soviet aggression and to prevent further expansion. Because of the novelty of the area into which the policy was extended, the speed with which it was implemented, and the precision of the reactions of all parties, American military assistance for Pakistan constitutes an almost ideal case study of international relations in a world in which the movement of events has been greatly accelerated.


2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 307-327
Author(s):  
Virsaviya Viver ◽  

The article discusses modern Eurasian integration - regional processes of unification in the post-Soviet space, in which Russia plays a guiding role. Despite the declaration by the American establishment of the importance of the Eurasian macro region and the deep involvement of the United States in the region’s affairs, the American foreign policy discourse clearly shows a lack of interest on the part of the expert community in integration in the post-Soviet space against the backdrop of Washington’s assistance in integration processes in other regions of the world. In this regard, the purpose of the article is to analyze the current practice of coverage in the American scientific and academic discourse of Eurasian integration processes with the active role of Russia. Based on the opinion of American experts from centrist, liberal and conservative think tanks, it is planned to determine the place of Eurasian integration issues in the American foreign policy discourse, to determine the dynamics of changes in the process of coverage of Eurasian integration by the American expert community, and to outline the nature of the assessments of American experts on Eurasian integration projects.


2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 404-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro Antonio Vieira ◽  
Helton Ricardo Ouriques

In this paper we examine the BRICS by focusing on one of its member states: Brazil. More specifically, we focus on the relationship between Brazilian foreign policy under President Lula (2003-2010), U.S. hegemonic decline, and the commodity boom that provided economic resources to sustain Brazil’s position in world politics. With the world financial crisis of 2008, Lula’s belle époque came to an end. Without the abundant resources of commodity exports, Lula’s successor, Dilma Rousseff, tried unsuccessfully to combat the economic slowdown by further strengthening the economic role of the state. With this expansionist economic policy, she was elected for a second term in office, but immediately embraced the previous orthodox economic policies, what coupled with lack of support from the Congress, threw the government into crisis. As a result, not only has the political economy of Brazil re-aligned with the interests of financial capital, but also its foreign policy has returned to its historical alignment with the United States. Our contention is that the BRICS will soon be of no relevance to Brazil.


Author(s):  
Valentina Aronica ◽  
Inderjeet Parmar

This chapter examines domestic factors that influence American foreign policy, focusing on the variety of ways in which pressure groups and elites determine and shape what the United States does in the international arena. It first considers how US foreign policy has evolved over time before discussing the US Constitution in terms of foreign policy making and implementation. It then explores institutional influences on foreign policy making, including Congress and the executive branch, as well as the role of ‘orthodox’ and ‘unorthodox’ actors involved in the making of foreign policy and how power is distributed among them. It also analyzes the Trump administration’s foreign policy, taking into account the ‘Trump Doctrine’ and the US strikes on Syria.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document