United States Foreign Policy after 1945 Essay Example for Free

United States Foreign Policy after 1945 Essay â€Å"President Clinton and I†¦ have spoken often about the goals of American foreign policy. Boiled down, these have not changed in more than 200 years. They are to ensure the continued security, prosperity, and freedom of our people. † (Albright 1998, p. 50-64) Thus were the words of then US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright back in 1998. Fast-forward to 2006 and we have President George W. Bush remarking on America as facing a ‘choice between the path of fear and the path of confidence. ’ The path of fear – isolationism and protectionism, retreat and retrenchment – appeals to those who find challenges too great, failing to see in them opportunities (Bush 2006). As Bush (2006) asserts, his administration has chosen the path of confidence, leadership over isolationism and the pursuit of free and fair trade and open markets over protectionism, consistent with the tradition of American policy. Founded on two pillars – promoting freedom, justice and human dignity, and confronting the challenges of our time by leading a growing community of democracies, the present national security strategy of the Bush administration maintains the primacy of expanding the national strength of the United States resting not merely on the strength of the military but on economic prosperity and a vibrant democracy as well. Yet Bush’s rather confrontational, militaristic approach as reflected in US foreign policy has been shown to have negative effects on America’s relations with its long-time allies, as well as in terms of projecting its image abroad in the somewhat turbulent arena of international relations, and ultimately casting doubts whether it is really in the national interest of the United States of America. The present paper aims to illustrate how this is so, through a discussion of US foreign policy emphasizing the critical aspects of national security, free trade, democracy, world peace and human rights. II. DISCUSSION National Security It is the recognized primary duty of the United States Government to ‘protect the American people and American interests, obligating the government to anticipate and counter threats using all resources of national power at its disposal, before these threats can do grave damage’ (The National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2006, p. 18). Anticipatory action taken in self-defense is considered of primary importance, particularly in view of terrorist attacks withWMD. The US-led global War on Terror after the 10/11 terrorist attacks is considered by the US State as ‘both a battle of arms and a battle of ideas’ (The National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2006, p. 9). It involves both the use of military force and other instruments of national power to capture and eliminate terrorists, deny them safe haven or control of any nation, prevent their access to WMD, and the cutting off of their sources of support. The US government shall employ a comprehensive strategy involving strengthened nonproliferation efforts, i. e. proactive counter-proliferation efforts to defend against and defeat WMD and missile threats before they are unleashed; and improved protection mitigating the consequences of WMD use (The National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2006, p. 18). The proliferation of nuclear weapons is recognized as posing the greatest threat to US national security in their capacity to inflict instant loss of life on a massive scale. The strategy of choice is on denying terrorists and nuclear states access to the essential ingredient of fissile material and to deter any transfer of nuclear material from states having this capability to rogue states and terrorists. The 9/11 terror attacks proved the vulnerability of the United States, acclaimed lone superpower of the world, to terrorism. In a bid to safeguard national security, the Bush administration declared a global war on terror, which undoubtedly leaves many fears of retaliatory attacks from terror groups. It is important to note that the problem of terrorism is a thorny issue and a multi-faceted one, involving not merely differences in religion and ideology but poverty and social grievances, among others, which are recognized by the National Security Strategy. Free Trade The promotion of free and fair trade has long been a tenet of American foreign policy as greater economic freedom is viewed as ultimately inseparable from political liberty (The National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2006, p. 25). Taking into consideration economic power as empowering individuals, which in turn leads to the demand for greater political freedom promoting greater economic opportunity and prosperity, the market economy is viewed as the single most effective economic system and the greatest antidote to poverty. The US promotes free and fair trade, open markets, a stable financial system, the integration of the global economy, and secure, clean energy development as the means towards economic liberty and prosperity. Economic freedom is viewed by the present administration as a ‘moral imperative,’ with the ‘liberty to create and build, buy, sell and own property fundamental to human nature and foundational to a free society’ (The National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2006, p. 27). Economic freedom creates diversified centers of power and authority which places limits on the reach of governments, expanding the free flow of ideas, exposing people to new ways of thinking and living and ultimately giving more control over their own lives. Even as most of the world affirms the appeal of economic liberty, it is the view of the present government that too many nations still hold fast to the ‘false comforts of subsidies and trade barriers’ which stifles growth in developed countries (The National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2006, p. 27). The US promotes the vision of a global economy welcoming to each and every nation-participant and encourages the voluntary exchange of goods and services. Issues on the establishment of a truly level playing field among developed and developing nations, the continuing significance and evolving roles of the post-World War multilateral institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund continue to haunt the rounds of free trade negotiations, serving as effective obstacles towards the full globalization and integration of free markets all over the world. Democracy It is the policy of the United States to seek and support democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world (The National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2006, p. 1). The avowed goal of US statecraft then is â€Å"help create a world of democratic, well-governed states that can meet the needs of their citizens and conduct themselves responsibly in the international system† (The National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2006, p. 1) through leading the international effort to end tyranny and promote effective democracy. Closely related to the goal of ending tyrannies, the US recognizes its role in helping newly free nations in the building of effective democracies – states which respect human dignity, are accountable to their citizens, and responsible towards their neighbors. Democracy is concretely expressed through elections wherein individuals and parties committed to the equality of all citizens, minority rights, civil liberties, voluntary and peaceful transfer of power, and the peaceful resolution of differences can freely participate, as well as the presence of institutions which protect individual liberty, independent media, freely competing political associations and political parties, an independent judiciary, professional legal establishment, and an honest and competent police force. This commitment to the promotion of freedom is coursed through several tactics varying among countries reflecting the culture and history of its people, from vocal and visible steps on behalf of immediate change to more quiet support laying the foundation for future reports. The US shall lead and call on other nations in a common international effort, yet it does not hesitate to act on its own if need be. Grave problems arise when the US is seen as intervening in what other countries may perceive as largely domestic affairs which does not concern Washington, and the perception of democracy as a Western imposition even in non-Western countries, fueling resentment and claims of on-going cultural imperialism in the promotion of American values even in still-largely traditional societies. World Peace Conflict among nations can arise from a variety of causes – external aggression, competing claims, internal revolt, poor governance, ethnic and religious differences, among others – which if left unaddressed, can eventually result to humanitarian disasters, the failure of states, and ungoverned areas which can become harbor terrorists. To address this, the Bush administration seeks to implement three levels of engagement: (1) conflict intervention; (2) post-conflict stabilization; and (3) reconstruction (The National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2006, p. 15). In terms of ensuring peace in an often tumultuous international arena of competing nations, the most effective long-term measure for conflict prevention and resolution is the promotion of democracy (The National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2006, p. 15). This is in line of the view that though effective democracies may still have disputes, they are more equipped to solve such differences through peaceful means, either bilaterally or in cooperation with other international institutions, formations or regional states. As some conflicts pose such grave threats to the broader national interests, conflict intervention may be deemed necessary to restore peace and stability, particularly in circumstances wherein the international community does not have enough trained military forces capable of performing peace-keeping missions. This has led to close the government closely working with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in improving state capacities for intervention in conflict situations, and support to the UN reforms seeking to improve its ability to carry out peacekeeping missions characterized by enhanced accountability, oversight and results-based management practices (The National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2006, p. 16). And the third level of engagement takes into consideration the need for post-conflict stabilization and reconstruction once peace has been restored. History has borne witness to success as resulting from the early establishment of strong local institutions, e. g. a functional judiciary and penal system, effective police systems, and enhancing governance capacity critical to the establishment of the rule of law and a free market economy, on the assumption that these in turn would provide the key to long-term stability and prosperity. It is also interesting to note that the pursuit of American interests is to be accomplished within the framework of cooperative relationships, particularly with its ‘oldest and closest friends and allies’ (The National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2006, p. 35). Another priority is the prevention of any re-emergence of the great power rivalries which had divided the world in previous eras, in such a way that these new approaches are flexible enough to permit effective action even in the face of differences of opinions among friends, yet strong enough to confront challenges. These principles guide American international relations, notably within its own hemisphere (the Western Hemisphere) considered the ‘frontline of defense of American national security’ (The National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2006, p. 37) which is envisioned to be fully democratic, bound together in good will, security cooperation and opportunity for all its citizens to prosper. Concretely, the goal includes strengthening relations with regional partners to make multilateral institutions, e. g. the Inter-American Development Bank, more effective and better able in fostering concerted action addressing threats to the region’s stability, prosperity, security or democratic progress. The Bush administration has identified key threats to international security in the form of rogue states, and its taking on a hard-line policy towards these states which could possibly fuel resentment and strong feelings of anti-Americanism among their peoples. World peace does not appear any less elusive in the contemporary period despite the end of the Cold War and the bipolarization of the world, as poverty, social inequality, racial, ethnic and religious differences continue to create social divides among people. Human Rights Tyranny is defined as the ‘combination of brutality, poverty, instability, corruption, and suffering forged under the rule of despots and despotic systems’ (The National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2006, p. 3), as is the case under the nations of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Iran, Syria, Cuba, Belarus and Burma, which treated the world’s interest in freedom’s expansion and immediate security threats as well, i. e. their pursuit of weapons of mass destruction (The National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2006. The goal of human rights promotion is closely related to the pursuit of democracy, world peace, and the promotion of global free trade. This becomes particularly acute when one considers political liberties and democratic institutions as vital towards attaining greater economic freedom, opportunities and prosperity in the context of a market economy. Chomsky (1982) notes that the US is no more engaged in programs of international good will than any other state has been as foreign policy is designed and implemented by narrow groups deriving their power from the domestic sources of state capitalism and control over the domestic economy. Within the nation-state, the effective ‘national interest’ is by and large articulated by those who control the central economic institutions, leaving the formulation of its disguise for the technocratic and policy-oriented intelligentsia. Human rights violations have been charged against US soldiers in occupied territories as well as among those in peace-keeping missions. Specific cases of human rights violations have been documented in US bases in South Korea, Japan, and in the former US bases in the Philippines. The preferential treatment for and custody of US soldiers in case of trial and conviction is also a major sore point between the US government and the ‘host’ countries.

Allegory for War in Battle of the Ants by David Thoreau Essay example -

Allegory for War in "Battle of the Ants" by David Thoreau The reading journal that I chose was "Battle of the Ants" by David Thoreau. I chose this essay because I felt that it was a strongly written piece about a somewhat interesting topic. When I first read it I was taken aback by its seemingly uninteresting nature of topic, but after I read it a couple more times I began to see its true beauty. The story is about government and war and depicted by ants battling to the death. "The legions of Myrmidons covered all the hills and vales in my wood-yard, and the ground was already strewn with all the dead and dying, both the red and the black," the ants represent humans struggling for freedom and power. There are two types of ants: the red ones who represent the rebellious soldiers fightin...

Talkin the Talk: An Examination of Black English in the American Education System :: Free Essays Online

Talkin the Talk: An Examination of Black English in the American Education System How many people here believe that schools should require the use of standard English at all times? That schools should respect all languages? How many people believe that Ebonics is a legitimate language that should not be compared to standard English? Most of you are probably wondering why I am interested in Ebonics. Obviously I’m not black. But, that does not mean that I can’t take an interest in the success of my friends and classmates. I attended Amherst Regional High School in Amherst, Massachusetts. My town is supposedly a liberal, open-minded place. But I always wondered why there were very few black students in my advanced-level classes and how come some of the black friends I had in the beginning of the year were no longer around at the end. I talked to one of my friends about this once. She told me that many black students in our school had moved from a nearby city and that they were not used to the academic standards of the school. Many of them became discouraged due to the lack of support of the teachers and some students even dropped out. This is a problem. In my opinion, many teachers do not respect students’ cultures if they are not a part of the mainstream, white culture. Although language is on ly one part of this respect, it is a large part of every student’s culture. Even though there has been a movement to improve inner-city schools and increase the success of black students, these programs would benefit any school around the country. Although the debate over the legitimacy of Ebonics as a language had been burning out, the Oakland school board decision in 1996 re-sparked this debate. Every marking period, in the Oakland school district, many African-American students brought home report cards singed with bad grades. In a school district where 53% of the student population is African-American, what concerned the school board was that these black students accounted for 71 percent of "special needs" students and received an average GPA of 1.8, compared to the average of 2.4 for all other students (Perry xi). It was time to correct that problem. The school board of Oakland, California organized a task force to do just this. The Ebonics Resolution, as the plan was called, recognized Ebonics as a legitimate language that deserved respect within the classroom.

Pablo Membreno

The plaintiff Pablo Membreno was a citizen of Honduras, who worked as an oiler on the ships owned by Costa Crociere, S. p. A (Costa), which was an Italian company whose headquarters were in Genoa, Italy. Costa fully owned another company Carnival Corporation, panama. Carnival Corporation was operating in Miami, Florida. Costa had no land – based offices in the United States. Membreno was hired on contract by Cruise Ships Catering & Service International, N. V. (CSCS), Netherlands Antilles, to work onboard Costa Atlantica, which began its cruise from Fort Lauderdale, Florida.While the ship was in international waters, Membreno injured his wrist in the course of his work. The plaintiff claimed that despite having reported the matter to the supervisor and the ship’s doctor, he had not been given medical treatment. Five days later, his contract was completed and he disembarked from the ship. In Honduras a surgeon diagnosed Membreno with Kinnock’s disease and recommen ded surgery. Membreno sought a second opinion in Miami from an orthopedic surgeon, who performed surgery on the plaintiff’s wrist.He also received physical therapy. Procedural History: Membreno filed a case in the Southern District Court of Florida seeking redress for his damage. The number of defendants in the case was four but later reduced to two upon a consensus of the parties to the case. Costa and CSCS invoked the doctrine of forum non conveniens to move the court for a dismissal. The district court dismissed the case and Membreno appealed in the Eleventh Circuit Court. Issues legal question:The legal issues raised were whether or not the plaintiff could seek redressal in US courts for an injury that had occurred in international waters, the area of applicability of the Jones Act and the General Maritime Laws and whether such actions could be dismissed on the grounds of forum non conveniens. Broad holding: The Jones Act and the General Maritime Laws apply only within th e territorial waters of the United States and the plaintiff will be precluded from filing suit at the location of a subsidiary company. Narrow holding:The district court rejected the application of the plaintiff seeking redress on the basis that he was injured in the international waters and the Florida company was merely a subsidiary company. Doctrinal Reasoning: In Szumlicz v. Norwegian Am. Line, Inc the court had held that if the laws of the United States were not applicable, then the action should be dismissed on the grounds of forum non conveniens (Szumlicz v Norwegian Am. Line, Inc, 1983). In Lauritzen v. Larsen, the Supreme Court laid down a set of eight factors to be satisfied.These factors are the place of the wrongful act, the national flag under which the ship was sailing, the domicile of the injured party, the dwelling place of the ship owner, the location where the parties had entered into the agreement, the approachability of a foreign forum, the law of the forum and t he place of operations of the ship owner (Lauritzen v. Larsen, 1953 ). In the present case, six conditions had been in the favor of the defendants and as such the defendants had argued that the United States law was not applicable to the plaintiff.Policy Reasoning: The district court had properly interpreted and applied the doctrine of forum non conveniens in this case and the Eleventh Circuit Court upheld the decision of the district court. Miscellaneous: There was no difference of opinion between the presiding judges and the decision was unanimous. References Lauritzen v. Larsen, 345 U. S. 571 (1953 ). Szumlicz v Norwegian Am. Line, Inc, 698F. 2d 1192 (11th Circuit Court 1983).

TIMEs Person of the Year Winners (1927-2017)

TIME's Person of the Year Winners (1927-2017) Since 1927, TIME Magazine has chosen a man, woman, or idea that for better or worse, has most influenced events in the preceding year. Although TIMEs list is not an academic or objective study of the past, the list gives a contemporary viewpoint of what was important during each year. In 2018, TIME issued four separate covers, memorializing journalists who lost their lives in 2018. They are Jamal Khashoggi, Washington Post columnist;  staff members of the Capital Gazette newspaper; Reuters journalists Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo; and Maria Ressa, journalist and founder of Rappler. TIMEs Person of the Year Winners 1927 Charles Augustus Lindbergh 1928 Walter P. Chrysler 1929 Owen D. Young 1930 Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi 1931 Pierre Laval 1932 Franklin Delano Roosevelt 1933 Hugh Samuel Johnson 1934 Franklin Delano Roosevelt 1935 Haile Selassie 1936 Mrs. Wallis Warfield Simpson 1937 Generalissimo Mme Chiang Kai-Shek 1938 Adolf Hitler 1939 Joseph Stalin 1940 Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill 1941 Franklin Delano Roosevelt 1942 Joseph Stalin 1943 George Catlett Marshall 1944 Dwight David Eisenhower 1945 Harry Truman 1946 James F. Byrnes 1947 George Catlett Marshall 1948 Harry Truman 1949 Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill 1950 American Fighting-Man 1951 Mohammed Mossadegh 1952 Elizabeth II 1953 Konrad Adenauer 1954 John Foster Dulles 1955 Harlow Herbert Curtice 1956 Hungarian Freedom Fighter 1957 Nikita Krushchev 1958 Charles De Gaulle 1959 Dwight David Eisenhower 1960 U.S. Scientists 1961 John Fitzgerald Kennedy 1962 Pope John XXIII 1963 Martin Luther King Jr. 1964 Lyndon B. Johnson 1965 General William Childs Westmoreland 1966 Twenty-Five and Under 1967 Lyndon B. Johnson 1968 Astronauts Anders, Borman and Lovell 1969 The Middle Americans 1970 Willy Brandt 1971 Richard Milhous Nixon 1972 Nixon and Kissinger 1973 John J. Sirica 1974 King Faisal 1975 American Women 1976 Jimmy Carter 1977 Anwar Sadat 1978 Teng Hsiao-Ping 1979 Ayatullah Khomeini 1980 Ronald Reagan 1981 Lech Walesa 1982 The Computer 1983 Ronald Reagan Yuri Andropov 1984 Peter Ueberroth 1985 Deng Xiaoping 1986 Corazon Aquino 1987 Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev 1988 Endangered Earth 1989 Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev 1990 The Two George Bushes 1991 Ted Turner 1992 Bill Clinton 1993 The Peacemakers 1994 Pope John Paul II 1995 Newt Gingrich 1996 Dr. David Ho 1997 Andy Grove 1998 Bill Clinton and Kenneth Starr 1999 Jeff Bezos 2000 George W. Bush 2001 Rudolph Giuliani 2002 The Whistleblowers 2003 The American Soldier 2004 George W. Bush 2005 Bill Gates, Melinda Gates, Bono 2006 You 2007 Vladimir Putin 2008 Barack Obama 2009 Ben Bernanke 2010 Mark Zuckerberg 2011 The Protester 2012 Barack Obama 2013 Pope Francis 2014 Ebola Fighters 2015 Angela Merkel 2016 Donald Trump 2017 The Silence Breakers 2018 The Guardians and the War on Truth Person of the Year Fast Facts Charles Lindbergh  (1927) was the first and youngest person to receive the distinction at 25 years old.Mrs. Wallis Warfield Simpson, the woman whom English  King Edward VIII abdicated  in order to marry, was the first woman to receive the honor (1936).Although a number of people have received the honor twice,  U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt  is the only person to have been named three times: 1932, 1934, and 1941.Adolf Hitler, the murderous leader of Nazi Germany, received the honor in 1938- before he started   World War II. Hitlers  TIME  cover, however, shows him with dead bodies hanging above him.Soviet leader Joseph Stalin, who was a U.S. ally during World War II, but who was ultimately responsible for the deaths of approximately 20 to 60 million of his own people, was awarded the honor twice.A whole generation was named in 1966: Twenty-five and Under.In 1982, the computer became the first object ever to receive the distinction.There are several years whe re large groups of people were nominated: the American Fighting-Man (1950), the Hungarian Freedom Fighter (1956), U.S. Scientists (1960), Twenty-Five and Under (1966), the Middle Americans (1968), and American Women (1975). The winner in 2006 was even more unusual. The winner was you. This choice was meant to draw attention to the impact of the world wide web, which had made each of our contributions both relevant and important.

bortion and Pro Life essays

bortion and Pro Life essays The topic of abortion is one that is currently deadlocked and unless there is a piece of critical evidence that is released, each side will filibuster the issue until both sides are completely exasperated. Rather than comment on this stalemate, the purpose of this paper is to explore only one remote aspect of abortion: the pro-life argument as described through the writings of Don Marquis. This stance is widely shared by those religious activists, our current president and is the only determinate factor of who can be elected into the Supreme Court. The entire topic of abortion is the termination of a birth while it is still in the womb. Those who favor the mother retaining her right to abort the pregnancy are considered pro-choice while pro-life supporters hold the opposite to be true. The following reasons are employed by pro-life advocates to support their argument: it is seriously wrong to kill a human being or one of its ambiguous variants; killing is a form of brutalization , it is wrong to commit any form of killing out of respect to the victim and lacking human features is not grounds for being lenient in killing something. Each reason will be followed by a counterpoint and then a cross-examination to outweigh the counterpoint. Beginning with the ambiguous variants argument, Don Marquis, in his article Why Abortion is Immoral, develops the idea that all arguments presented before that attempt to put a time restraint on when a life begins. For us to focus on the main points of his argument, he has assumed all restraints to be true. If one restraint says a baby is human at conception, then the pro-life argument would have no problems saying that murder is being committed because the one-celled zygote at this particular stage is human. Conversely, if another restraint says a baby is human at birth, then a mother has every right to terminate her pregnancy even seconds before her delivery of the newb...

Listen to and Learn Spanish on the Internet

Listen to and Learn Spanish on the Internet Many people want to hear what native-speaker Spanish sounds like, but dont have access to native speakers or even Spanish-language radio or TV. Chances are that if youre reading this article, you have all the tools you need need to start listening. An abundance of Spanish-language webcasts, podcasts, and other programming is available for free on the Internet. The system requirements for listing to Internet audio vary with the site, but chances are that if your computer was built within the past three or four years, you already have the hardware you need. Most sites that provide audio content also have links to the software you need. Most audio content can be played using one of three audio players that are readily available for free: Windows Media Player, RealPlayer, and Apple QuickTime. The three are available for both recent versions of the Windows and Macintosh operating systems; the RealPlayer is also available for Linux. Some sites also have downloadable audio in MP3 or other formats that you can listen to on portable players. A high-speed Internet connection is helpful, although a good dial-up connection will sometimes be sufficient if you arent Web surfing at the same time. Listening Online in Spanish Spanish-language programming can be found for almost any interest, and a complete list would be far too long to list here. Following, however, are some of the sites that have been recommended by readers of this site: Batanga: You wont find any classical music here (unless you count classic rock), but youll find just about every other style of music.BBC Mundo: True, the BBC is well-known British news service. However, youll find quality programming in Spanish here.Deutsche Welle: This German network offers streaming programming in nearly all the European language and then some. At the time of this writing, however, its Spanish-language programming is not available to U.S. listeners.Ke Buena: Popular music from Acapulco, Mexico.La100: Rock from Argentina.Notes in Spanish: Tips about Spain, news, conversation and all the cool words they never teach you in class.M80 Radio: Classic rock from Madrid.Mitre: Variety of programming from Argentina.RAC105: International rock and pop from Spain. The home page is in Catalan, but if youre adept at reading Spanish you can probably comprehend most of it.Metro951: Self-described as the most popular radio, from Argentina.Radio Bilingà ¼e: Public radio-type progra mming from the United States. Radio Isla: Talk shows and more, from Puerto Rico.Radio Jai: Catering to Argentinas Jewish community with a mix of programming.Radio Progreso: Music, news and a bit of propaganda from Cuba.RTVE: This network from Spain provides a choice of six channels streamed over the Internet.Terra Radios: Talk, music and sports are featured on stations from Guatemala.Yahoo Music: About a dozen music stations feature Spanish music of various genres including rock, rap, reggaeton, pop, tejano, and jazz.