The Us Foreign Policy Essay

Custom Student Mr. Teacher ENG 1001-04 20 February 2017

The Us Foreign Policy

The political norm “domestically earned and internationally achieved” can be attributed to the famous 25-year old American National Guard pilot Charles A. Lindenberg who was the first person to fly solo on his Spirit of St Louis Airplane non-stop across the Atlantic Ocean and landed at the Le Bourget Aerodrome in Paris on May 21st 1927 (Jantunen, 1998). Basically, the norm domestically earned and internationally achieved lays the chronicle of Lindenberg who then worked with the US Air force and Defense Department, wherein his famous voyage was patterned by the US’ foreign defense strategy in World War II during the 1930’s (Cole, W.

, 1998; in Jantunen, A. , 1998). As a result, the US domestic affairs were able to cross international borders and foster foreign relations that eventually led to the creation of its foreign policies. The use and review of literatures will be the guiding methodology of this paper which will discuss the US’ interstate (domestic) and intrastate (international) affairs in view of evolving its foreign policy. Influences that shape US foreign policy The democratic processes involving the sovereign will of the people are the bottom-line of policy initiatives through legislation.

On the other hand, situational factors primarily influence the sudden enactment of a policy. According to the book, ‘American Public Policy: An Introduction’, published in 2006 by Clark Cochran, Lawrence Mayer, T. Carr and N. Joseph Cayer, policies are classified according to purposes, types, and goods. Basically, the classification of a public policy plays a key role in promoting moral and social values. For example, if the classification of a public policy pertains to preserving domestic peace and order, it also results in the formation of international treaties against terrorism by allied governments.

In other words, a policy has a dual role— in order to secure the interstate (domestic), there must be an intrastate (foreign) policy consistent with preventing the vulnerability of the people and state from potential external attacks or threats of terrorism. The 9/11 Tragedy objectively result in a large public influence that resolutely condemned and abhorred terrorism. In effect, the US Congress has legislated and enacted series of homeland defense and security policies that has presently empowered the National Strategy for Homeland Security Act of 2007.

The enforcement of that policy works within the intrastate strategic framework, in which the scope of enforcement crosses international borders. In sum, it may be perceived that US foreign policy represents the domestic needs of the people or the interest of the state to uphold the economic resources and political affairs of the government. Moreover, the processes in creating US foreign involve various international perspectives. President’s formal and informal foreign policy making powers

The Presidents formal and informal foreign policy-making powers today work two ways— first, the President being the Chief Executive, can veto a decree or enact orders having the formal constitutional mandate and second, he or she informally can influence ministerial function through the so-called “mandamus duty” [having extraordinary writ commanding an official to perform a ministerial act that the law recognizes as an absolute duty and not a matter for the official’s discretion] as exemplified by the enactment of National Strategy for Information Sharing (NSIS) in year 2007 (E.

O. 13356, 2006; Sec. 11; in NSIS, 2007). The formal and informal Presidential powers may be deduced as a combined political capability of the President that emphasizes the “political will” in enacting or rejecting policies that may be favorable or unfavorable to both political and economic affairs of the government. Moreover, these powers may be best described by the historical process of US foreign policy creation that can be traced in the Monroe Doctrine. Based on Steven W. Hook’s book, ‘U. S.

Foreign Policy: The Paradox of World Power’, the National Security Act of 1947, which created the Department of Defense (DOD), the National Security Council (NSC), and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), provides an excellent example of how policy decisions are largely made from prior policy experiences. Hook pointed out that the combination of formal and informal political powers most likely becomes a personal preference on the political will of the president, in which today, according to Hook, the “Bush Doctrine” has supplanted the Monroe Doctrine that once opposed the European foreign policy.

In short, Hook’s perception reflects the presidential formal and informal policy making powers today that subsist a culture of the United States foreign policy which is considered both moralistic and self-interested and which stems from geographical factors and colonial history (Hook, 2007). Significance of political terminologies Based on the interpretation of Roberta Tovey (2000), author of the article ‘Best Firms More Alike Than Different Around the Globe’, an adhocracy refers to an organization that lacks structure, which is opposite to a “bureaucracy”.

In short, adhocracy pertains to the creation of a task group also called as “ad-hoc” (impromptu), which is a type of structure that can be found in creativity-based companies which are flexible as new projects arise. To cite the case of the “Watergate Scandal” implicating former US President Richard Nixon, the term “political questions” include the conduct of foreign policy, the ratification of constitutional amendments, and the organization of each state’s government as defined in its own constitution.

The rule preventing federal courts from deciding such cases is called the political question doctrine (United States v. Nixon, 418 U. S. 683, 94 S. Ct. 3090, 41 L. Ed. 2d 1039; US-DOJ, 1974; in Legal Dictionary, 2008). During the time of former US President Harry Truman, the National Security Act of July 26, 1947 created the National Security Council under the chairmanship of the President, with the Secretaries of State and Defense as its key members, to coordinate foreign policy and defense policy, and to reconcile diplomatic and military commitments and requirements (US-Public Law 80; 253, 1947; in NSC, 2008).

As cited from the US Public Law, the alliances of political personalities in US government agencies, the interest groups of lobbying organizations, and the legislative committee members with jurisdiction over a particular functional area of government policy are said to be “triangles strong as iron”. The relationships are so politically powerful that it directly influence and interferes with the general interests in policy-making.

Moreover, in a Presidential turn over ceremony (farewell speech) of US former President Dwight Eisenhower in 1961, he stated that “the immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience that influence economic, political, even spiritual aspects felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government”. Eisenhower defined the term “military-industrial complex” or MIC which refers to the US Armed Forces’ suppliers of weaponry, services, and civil government (Eisenhower, D. , 1961). Conclusion

Based on the brief review of the US foreign policy, it may be concluded that it has earned domestic power and achieved international dominance. The presidential “political will” amidst public dispensation basically evolves and transforms the intrastate affairs. It may also be deduced that the political system develops these dominant powers result in foreign policies that could either be beneficial or detrimental to international boundaries.


Carr, T. , Cayer, J. N. , Cochran, C, and Mayer, L. , and (2006). ‘American Public Policy: An Introduction’.Thompson/Wadsworth Publishing, 8th Edition. ISBN: 0-534-60163-4. Hook, S. W. (2007) ‘U. S. Foreign Policy: The Paradox of World Power’. CQ Press, 2nd Edition, ISBN 978-0-87289-466-2. Retrieved 10 April 2008 from http://www. cqpress. com/product/US-Foreign-Policy-The-Paradox-of-World. html. Jantunen, A. (1998). ‘Developing for Peace: An Analysis of Charles A. Lindbergh’s Views on American Foreign Policy’. Retrieved 10 April 2008 from http://www. charleslindbergh. com/pdf/lindbergh2. pdf. Legal Dictionary (2008). ‘Political Question’. United States v. Nixon, 418 U. S.

683, 94 S. Ct. 3090, 41 L. Ed. 2d 1039, US-DOJ (1974). Retrieved 10 April 2008 from http://legal-dictionary. thefreedictionary. com/Political+question+doctrine. National Strategy for Information Sharing. (2007). ‘Information Sharing: Successes and Challenges In Improving Terrorism- Related Information Sharing’. Retrieved 10 April 2008 from http://www. state. gov/html. Roberta, T. (2000). ‘Best Firms More Alike Than Different Around the Globe’. Retrieved 10 April 2008 from http://www. msi. org. US Department of State (2007). ‘National Strategy for Homeland Securit

Free The Us Foreign Policy Essay Sample


  • Subject:

  • University/College: University of California

  • Type of paper: Thesis/Dissertation Chapter

  • Date: 20 February 2017

  • Words:

  • Pages:

Let us write you a custom essay sample on The Us Foreign Policy

for only $16.38 $13.9/page

your testimonials