Diplomacy in the United States can be traced back to Sir Benjamin Franklin who is considered Americas first diplomat to the outside world. Being also a part of the drafters of the Declaration of Independence, Benjamin Franklin was the representative of the American the continental Congress in France. Franklin carried the American spirit of economy and civilization in a rigid way to France standing for the American way of democracy instead of the aristocracy that was prevalent during that century. He practiced high-society diplomacy better than most of his European peers, especially when it served crucial American interests. CITATION Edm01 \l 1033 (Morgan, 2001)Franklins sophisticated and manipulative democracy made him able to negotiate the Franco-American treaty alliance of 1778 despite strict orders from Philadelphia not to associate with aristocracy and promote the spirit of democracy that was being agitated by America during the century based on its declaration of independence- a document that franklin knew too well on its provisions. He helped negotiate for weapons that were used to help the jeopardized American revolutionists. Franklin is an epitome of what American scholars identify as the realist streak when it comes to Americas foreign policy. CITATION Edm01 \l 1033 (Morgan, 2001)Franklin was hence the first American representative to the outside world to ever make deals for the benefit of the American people exposing the essentials of diplomatic skills which by then were rare or close to impossible since there were little or no diplomats. Diplomacy at such a time was based purely on interest and ties. If two countries were at war or simply were in dispute such as during the cold war or the two world wars, it was impossible to send a diplomat to such a state. Germany for example at that time was not even accorded state recognition by a majority of the western countries for the reasons that they were the perpetrators of the first and the Second World War.
REASONS FOR AMERICAN ENTRY INTO WORLD WAR 1
ON April 2nd 1917, President Woodrow Wilson went before the American Congress to request entry into world war one against the Germans. Wilsons reasons for such were that Germany had violated its pledge of suspended unrestricted submarine welfare in the north Atlantic and Mediterranean oceans and that Germany had attempted to enter into an alliance with Mexico against the U.S.A. two days later on April 4th, the U.S congress supported the move to join the war against Germany bringing America to be among the nations fighting the Germans though for a different reason all together. After the war, Germans were defeated and demilitarized and even forced to pay reparations to the countries affected. CITATION Alb98 \l 1033 (Tuchman, 1998)The diplomacy thereafter
After the end of the first world, nations for the first time came together to put up laws that would see that such an event does not occur again in future. This meant that countries would have representatives in the negotiating table so as to help bring unity in the world since the impact of the war was felt worldwide including the colonies of the industrial powers by then. This led to the birth of the League of Nations which America though the brainchild of it, did not become party to the same treaty.
Diplomacy during the Second World War.
Prior to the pearl harbor bombing in the by the Japanese, the American government seemed too neutral about the war. However, this neutrality was only theoretical in nature. The American involvement in the war seemed to be neutral only on the face of it. Diplomacy was the instrument being used by the American people in furtherance of the war. To support the royal air force and the royal army of the Britons, the American government through President Woodrow Wilson used the act of diplomacy in secrecy so as to ensure that the interest of the American citizens were protected. Since the end of the Second World War, the American diplomacy policy has failed tremendously. Every individual that has sat on the seat of this diplomacy has tried coming up with laws that would favor the American diplomacy but have however failed terribly. This paper I hence going to discuss in depth the notion of orphaned democracy and its effects to the American government and the American people at large after the Second World War. CITATION Rob89 \l 1033 (Graves, 1989)THE COLD WAR
From 1940 to about 1991, the world was dominated by what was known as the cold war regime. A regime of war without necessarily using real force or real war. The war was between two major countries- Russia and America who had different countries aligned to it. Each country at this time was majorly fighting for dominance and superiority. The United States sought allies actively and subsidized it through military and economic aid as well as diplomatic help which was accorded to any country that pledged its allegiance to America. As a move to prevent the spread of communism which was being advocated for by the Russians, the Americans developed a system called containment. This was adopted by the U.S diplomat George Kennan in 1947. The idea of containment was to counter act the spread of communism with force wherever it developed without using nuclear weapons. The U.S foreign policy goals during this period to counter the acts and the rise of communism involved
The U.S and its allies in the Korean War.
The overthrow of the Iranian government.
The Vietnam War
The six day War
Some of the successes of the diplomatic initiatives by the America were the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the opening of the Peoples Republic of China. CITATION Ken11 \l 1033 (Follet, 2011)The issue of containment however as scholars have put it was a major setback to the diplomacy of the United States. It simply depicted America as defensive rather than offensive. Their role in the war was to make sure that the communists do not expand instead of ensuring that America was expanding. It viewed those areas expanding as peripheral areas where America had no interest at all or if any, it was very minimal. George Kennan has hence been depicted as a major reason for orphaning of the diplomatic policy of America especially during the cold war period. His ideas in the real sense when analyzed critically simply ensured that America does not advance in its diplomatic policies. It also showed just how much the communists were willing to go for the sake of seeking the much needed and important influence. This was a rejection to the Old world Diplomacy. CITATION Ian98 \l 1033 (Duncun, 1998)America could also not act on the advancement of the communists everywhere in the world. This would deplete their resources and sink them economically putting into consideration the effects of the great depression. They would also go on creating more enemies; a move that would end up killing their own diplomatic policies in as much as they wanted to make it better than that of the communists. Force and idealistic approaches hence trampled over the diplomacy that was agitated by Benjamin Franklin during the previous century. CITATION nat06 \l 1033 (brown, 2006) This impliedly was contravening the provisions of the American Declaration of Independence. The statements of George K., Marshall and Acheson who were all diplomats were filled with use of force and threats of use of force by military and diplomatic means instead of compromises and necessary limits a move that seemed detrimental to the foreign policies of America in the long run though from the myopic view they seemed to be lucrative and very fruitful CITATION Geo51 \l 1033 (Kennan, 1951). The Vietnam War was the perfect example of just how much containment could be detrimental. Their loss in the war was a major proof that compromises were a part of the strategy that would have been applied instead of continuously using force or a threat of it. CITATION Joh02 \l 1033 (Lewis, 2002)The election of Richard Nixon and the appointment of Kissinger as his political advisor saw a turning point in the Vietnamese war. Kissinger showed his readiness and willingness to negotiate echoing the acts of Benjamin Franklin that diplomacy is not about finding a perfect solution but choosing the lesser evil. The American people have for a long thought that they should always have their way in diplomatic issues worldwide. Even in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, the Americans still believed that negotiations were not the best way to go about the whole process. Their rule on terrorism is that we dont negotiate with terrorists. Diplomatic compromises is never on their dictionary. CITATION Pet02 \l 1033 (Jeffreys, 2002)ALLIANCE MISSMANAGEMENT.
Among the countries that have been accredited with having more alliances worldwide is America. Since the post war period of 1945, America has been on the move to make alliances some through treaties while others through friendly relations with major countries in the world today. However, as different scholars put it, these alliances are based majorly on America and not the countries that are part of the alliance. The relationship between America and the rest of the world to a greater extent is one which is one-sided. Every policy made by the treaty is usually in favor of America and not that country. Theoretically, the relationship is said to be for the economic, social, cultural or military benefit for the two countries. However, in practice, the relationship is usually to the advantage of America. America views all countries which have alliances to it as secondary countries with it being the primary country. It is always a battle of superiority and control even in times where such are not necessary. CITATION Mel09 \l 1033 (Leffler, 2009)Africa and Asia have been the worst affected by this type of alliance mismanagement. Their view on friendly relations with such alliances is that it gives them the opportunity to advance economically and military wise without serious political bargain and that is among the reasons they have invested heavily in Africa. Their diplomacy policies are non-negotiable regardless of the municipal laws of the countries. They always ensure to have a say in all matters. CITATION Joh99 \l 1033 (McAdams, 1999)In Kenya for example, during their 2013 general elections, the then secretary of state M.s Condoleezza Rice stated that choosing leaders facing charges has consequences. This simply meant that they were going to review their alliance with Kenya. This shows how one sided the relations are to an extent of threatening to withdraw their alliance simply because they know they are always on the upper hand. CITATION Lin14 \l 1033 (Kiki, 2014)Scholars have however argued that this mismanagement of alliances has its genesis after world war two where countries chose to borrow from America so as to start a fresh. America however took this to their advantage misusing it at her own pleasure for her own benefits.
Throughout history it has been evident that America has never pursued serious diplomacy with nationalist leaders. It has always opted for economic sanctions and covert operations as an alternative.
The American belief of power is that compromising makes you the weaker party. They always believe in hard bargaining in their diplomacy policies. Throughout the Cold War, their containment doctrine was to suppress those under the communist influence so as to remain the stronger party; an action they still believe in up to now.
If Benjamin Franklin were alive, he would have regretted making the compromises he made in France. Everything that is currently happening in America with regards to foreign policy has nothing to do with it and has got everything to do with power. To continue gaining influence for her own betterment. The...
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SuperbGrade website, please click below to request its removal:
- How and Why Linguist Imperialism Exists
- Principle-Centeres Leadership
- Impact on Human Relationships Under Nazism and Stalinism
- The Problem of Homelessness in Hawaii
- Argumentative Essay Against the Death Penalty
- Expository Essay on Roanoke Island Freedmens Colony
- American Civil War in William Faulkners A Rose for Emily - Literary Analysis Essay