MLA Format Responses from each question. not a summary you have to apply the readings to the concept of the assi

MLA Format Responses from each question. not a summary you have to apply the readings to the concept of the assignment

America’s unique problems of ambition
U.S Army crosses into Iraq
• 2015 Paris climate agreement to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change. 195 signatories
• The United States guided creation of this treaty
• Older example of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea or The Law of
the sea Treaty, 1982
• The United States guided creation of this treaty more than any other state, but is one of
the few to no join.
• Why such contradictory behavior?

1916 President Wilson is re-elected on a platform dedicated to neutrality in the Wold
1917 Wilson leads America into the war
Why the sudden switch?
Still the world’s biggest foreign policy question: what will America do?

Victory celebration or foreign policy disaster? December 1918
Celebrating the end of war and the return of 4 million military personnel
Consequences? What consequences?
Why are troops coming home? Why the rush?
Example of noncomprehension: a foreign policy disaster
• Celebrating the end of war and the return of 12 million military personnel
America miscalculates in Vietnam, 1958-75

From the overwhelming optimism of Americas intervention in Vietnam in 1965 ( all
To the pessimism of 1968
What did this happen?
Was this the inevitable working of system structure?
II. the greates foreign policy question: why do events happen?

Four essential concepts: contingency, discourse, system structure and agency
The problem of too much. So what matters most?
The immediate or particular vesus general or deep causes?
Events or apparent causes versus real causes?
System versus individuals?
Necessity versus choice?
Four essential concepts: CONTINGENCY

Do events just happen?
How important is randomness?
Other examples: the assassination at Sarajevo 1914, September 11, Hurricane Irma?
Or is randomness an illusion that policy should be able to anticipate?
Four essential concepts: DISCOURSE

Foreign policy occurs in a sea of statements, commentary and scholarship
Which words matter most?
How do we evaluate all the words? Which to stress, which to ignore
Four essential concepts: SYSTEM STRUCTURE

Are Americas alliances the results of systemic necessity or individual choices?
A system has characteristics different from its units
A system creates structures, it limits the freedom of the units
Does the international system compel America to act in specific ways?
– the north Atlantic Treaty Organization ( NATO) 1949
Four essential concepts : AGENCY

People matter, they can influence events
But just because people are present doesn’t mean they matter most
What matter most: contingency, discourse, system structure or individual agency

IN 1972-74, Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinnger resolved the Vietnam war, superpower
nuclear weapons, China relations and Middle East War
Were they personally essential or just official? Were they brilliant or helpful?

President Geprge H.W. Bush with Societ Communist Party Genereal Secretary Mikhail
Gorbachev, 1991.
Were they essential or just official? Brilliant or irrelevant?
Did they end the cold war or did they preside over a systemic process?
– will this be the year the President decides to:
Start war with Iran?
Withdraw from NATO?
Withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty?
Withdraw from the 2010 New Start Treaty with Russia?
Short reading John Winthrop 1587/8-1649
What is that mean been an American

• GEORGE WASHINGTON ( bby Gilbert Stuart 1797)
• Alexander Hamilton ( John Trumbull 1792)
• They shape the creation. Denying exceptionalism, stressing systemic structural
• HERE: Reinhold Niebuhr, Hans Morgenthau, and Stephen Walt
II. the city upon a hill: Origins of American Feoreign policy
• Hooks, U.S Foreign Policy, Ch. 1.
• John Winthrop, A Modell of Christian Charity, 1630
• Paul Pillar, ‘American good fortune’, Political Science Quarterly, Winter 2016-17
• Reinhold Niebuhr, ‘ The innocent nation in an innocent world’.
The city upon a hill:
Origins of American Foreign Policy
Today: Five approaches to American Foreign Policy
Empirical Study: Hook
Historical debates: the meaning of foreign policy

Hook’s American (ch.1)
Empirical approach: The paradox of world power?
America’s unique position (primacy in GDP and Milex)
External forces: Balance of power ( B-of-P)
Problems OF PRIMACY: RISE OF OTHER POWERS ( China, others), opposition to
globalization, armed violence.
Paradox of America’s World Power: domestic culture and politics vs international
primacy. “ A political culture largely indifferent to foreign affairs”.
• Not national security policy, but what if national security takes it over?
• But no clear distinctions between foreign and security policy.
• Institutional approach: What State Department does?
• But all agencies have foreign sections: DoD, FBI, Commerce, Agriculture, Postal Service,
• Here: Foreign policy is a set of ideas and institutions guiding America’s relationship with
the rest of the world.
“ Paul Pillar,’ American good fortune and misperception about the outside world’, Political
Science Quarterly, Winter 2016-17
• America has a distinct relationship with the rest of the world.
• Above all, exceptional freedom to choose policies.
• Geography is a major force: historic isolation, plentiful resources, controlled interaction
• Attitudes also are a shaping force: suspicion of other countries and peoples.
• But these same considerations make it difficult for Americans to understand others.
Exceptional Freedom
• Six great shifts in American foreign policy:
• – Colonial exploitation or refuge 1607-1776
• – neutrality and caution 1776-1823
• – continental hegemony 1823-1898
• -great power engagement 19898-1941
• -global hegemony 1945-1999
• -global pre-emption 2001-2013
• Return to neutrality? 2017Common themes:
– Dominance of choice
– Foreign policy is not essential
– America controls its global role

The first debate:
Colonial exploitation or refuge: Virginia principles vs. Massachusetts principles
Here: the Virginia colony, America is for exploitation
Shakespeare, The Tempest, 1610-11
• Presumption: Colonization is temporary, a matter of choice, ends as circumstances
• Economic foundation of national identity
• Creation and expansion come through human choice, agency
• Exploitative engagement is risk free.
• Settlers are free of normal morality and restraints on conduct
• Expectation od return to the metropolis
• America is part of the world, in dialogue with humanity (the Enlightenment).
o Corollary: foreign policy can be derived from national and controlled to serve
rational needs
Alternative vision: Massachusetts colony
John Smith, A Description of new England, 1616
• Permanent refuge
The Puritan vision
• Courtesy of john Winthrop 1587-1649
Winthrop’s Massachusetts Visions
• Religious foundations of national identity:
• Divine creation and divine superiority
• The settlement is created to be separate; return is inconceivable
• Not a country but a mission, serves the world
• Anti-cosmopolitan: cannot learn from the world
• Domestic fixation
• Not democratic
• No place for secular and rational logic
• Compromise us sacrilegious, imperative of absolute victory
Corollary: foreign policy is irrelevant or dangerous
• Jesus’s sermon on the Nount (Matthew 5:14), ‘ you are the light if the world. A city that
is set on a hill cannot be hidden.’
• Augustine city of God, 426 AD
• President-elet Kennedy, January 1961: ‘ I have been guided by the standard John
Winthrop….’ We shall be as a city upon a hill- the eyes of all people are upon us’. Today
the eyes of all people are truly upon us.’
• Kenny transforms Winthrop’s vision: a global focus.
• Candidate Ronald Regan, November q980,’I have quote John Winthrop’s wprds more
than once on the campaign trail this year- for I believe that Amercans in 1980 are every
bit as committed to that sivion of a shining ‘city on a hill’, as were those long ago
• Since th
• Declaration completes the Puritan project
• A Virginian secularizes Puritan Christianity
• Turns politics into a project for salvation

Debating 1776: Military dominance versus diplomatic effectiveness
Surrender of General Burgoyne to general Gate, 17 October 1777 by John Trumbull
Here: military dominance. America wins through Gate’s triumph at Saratoga
The conventional tale: military victory is sufficient, it solves problems
Diplomatic dominance: Franklin in Paris, 1777
– Here, Diplomatic dominance. Franklin’s diplomatic victory in Paris, Adams in Amsterdam
Irony: a foreign policy constitution
– Articles of confederation 1776
• Jefferson’s constitution
• Basic problem: the legitimate role of the central government
• Overwhelmingly about foreign policy
• Presumption: foreign policy is based on the law
• Revived in 1861-65
• Ideas still active, with every effort to develop foreign policy through legislations,
regulations, and the courts.
A domestic policy document:
Constitution of 1787
• Article I; Congress
• Article II; President
• Article IV; States
o Opposite of the articles of confederation
o Emphasis: on war, not foreign policy
o Basic problem: the legitimate role of the central government is unresolved
o Problem: vagueness and framer’s intent
o Problem: near inability to amend. ,
Federalist Papers 1787
• Federalists no. 3 and 4 (John Jay): the US will be safer when the states not free to act
separately, and safer from aggression of others when most unified
• Federalists no. 8 (Alexander Hamilton): Security requires what other countries have,
above all a standing army. Insecurity leads to despotism
• Federalists no. 10 9James Madison) and 24 (Hamilton): inability of one faction (party) to
monopolize power insures domestic liberty, while permitting the federal government to
still be effective
• Foreign policy is not an exceptional activity
• The United States is subject to the same rules as other countries. The basis of American
Where is sovereignty?
• The government (elected officials)?
• Specific institutions (congress, president, courts)?
• The state (the civil service and agencies)?
• The people (electoral process, polling, popular sovereignty)?
American Perspective: Who needs foreign policy?
Thomas Jefferson’s neutrality
Not everyone agreed: Peter Pencil. ‘Intercourse or Impartial Dealings’
Alexis de Tocqueville, 1805-1859
• Unique man at a unique moment
• Witnessing the decline of aristocracy and rise of democracy
• Came OSTENSIBLY to America is study its prisons, more to study democracy
• RIGTH: the Eastern State Penitentiary, Philadelphia, and de Tocqueville’s travel route.
o Importance of reading an author’s stand-point, presumption or goals
o De Tocquiville is an aristocrat witnessing the end of aristocratic rule in France
o Still enough French aristocracy to take aristocracy seriously
o And in 1831, enough democracy in America to critique it accurately
o A winess
• De Tocqueville’s critique: The law matters less than the nature of society
• Problem of democracy and populism: gain legitimacy, lose control
• Washington’s unheard words?
• The people are driven by sentiment, not predictable.
• Government loses authority and independence
• Democratic loses authority and independence
• Democratic foreign policy struggles to be consistent or complete.
Reinhold Niebuhr,’The innocent nation in an innocent world’, in The Irony of American
History (1952) ch.2
Beyond de Tocqueville: The concept of national character refined.
A tangent: Niebuhr’s serenity prayer:
• Rationalist theologian preoccupied with the problem of original sin.
• His solution is reconciliation between individuals and society; thus the serenity prayer
• Advocates political realism, policy based on compromise between capability and
• Frightened by populism, superpower crusading
• Acknowledges the problem of having both action and self-restraint un a populist
• contrast with john Adams in human nature
• OR with Jefferson’s absolute ambitions
• What does an innocent nation do?
• Niebuhr addresses a specific debate: American post-1945 engagement and alliance
politics. how to apply his words today?
• Alternative: Christian realism (Power and human rights?)
• Business-like: forthrifht, anti-relational, anti-process, result-oriented, rapid, deals
permitted, but can be confrontational (Virginia?)

Legalistic: careful and comprehensive, uncompromising, self-righteous, no agreement is
preferred to a bad agreement. (Puritan?0
• Moralistic: Virtue first, position is primary, and failure to agree is an indictment of the
other’s virtue, while relations, process and outcome are secondary (puritan!)
• Hegemonic: amoral and absolutist (Virginian!)
What America is not: a relational negotiator.
There always is choice
• Example of world War Two, a social construction, a choice of interpretation
• Something absolute and perfect
• The first war with a coherent propaganda campaign, that still shapes strategic and
tactical expectations today
• A PC war (patriotic correctness): hard to question
• Compare Russia’s Great Patriotic War, and America’s Greatest Generation
• Alternative vision. The Nakes and the Dead (1948) and Catch-22(1961). The war may not
be pointless, but all aspects you as a soldier are involved in are pointless or much worse
– The tale so far
• American foreign policy is exceptionally free and exceptional torn (Hook and Pillar)
• Affected by national identity
• Two different traditions: Virginian and Massachusetts
• The Puritan project of aspiring for
Terse. We wish they had offered a little more guidance. But pay attention to the little
they did.

Beyond the law: Social explanations
De Tocqueville: the law matters less than the character of society
The problem of democracy and populism: gains legitimacy, loses control.
The people are driven by sentiment, not predictable.
Government loses authority and independence
In a democracy, foreign policy cannot be consistent or complete
Also see Hook, Niebuhr and Pillar
Social explanations: Where is the reality?
– Norman Rockwell, triple selft-Portrait
Revealing the nature of his craft, what he really thought about our ability to know to see
to understand. Our inspiration and goals are knowable ( This the clippings on the
canvas) but our reality is vague and obscure
Ideas behind foreign policy
Preferred images: HEROIC AND WELCOMING
Read Jacksonianism point of view of the readings
Today’s themes
Origins of American foreign policy liberalism
The Wilsonian innovation
Wilson’s ghost; post-war liberal consensus
Explaining American rejections of the liberal
Explaining Hook’s foreign policy cycles, 1941-2017
• 1941- PRIMACY: massive expansion and norm building (War, UN and Bretton Woods)
• 1945- RESTRAIN: Extreme retreat
Schools of thought approach to American Foreign Policy
• Schools assumption: America created rival approaches or identities and switches
between these. Schools are not dialectic. The problem cannot be solved.
• Alternative:
General background
– Frontier innocence and exceptionalism
– American is innocent;
The global origins of liberalism
• 1800s universal expectation of greater individual equality
• 1800s universalization of democracy, universal voting
• Rising discontent with side-effects of state sovereignty: conflict, crises, war, inequality,
The American origins of liberalism
o The Lieber Code or Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United
States in the Field, General Order No.100, April 1863
• Americans are absorbing global trends, associated with the rise of muddle classes,
• Birth of an idea: transforming international behavior through law:
• Lincoln and Lieber Code (left), 1863,
• The same general idea: creation of The Universal Postal Union, 1863-74
• And the First Geneva Convention, 1864
Liberal foreign policy presumptions
• The state is both a solution and a problem
• Limiting the state balances the need for power and the need to restrain power
• The state must follow rule of law and respect individual needs
• Above all, this means inhibiting the use of force, and minimizing its effects
• Universalization of Western norms and principles regarding human rights and liberties is
the key.
• Liberalism makes international politics a global project
McKinley’s Philippines problem,1898
• Unintended consequence of War with Spain,1898
• A war of liberation or conquest?
• Annexation, independence, or international control?
• Conflicting values. Can American be a colonial power without ceasing to be itself?
Rational: serving out Little Brown Brothers
– American in the Philippines, 1898-1946
• Christian mission: serving, improving, civilizing
• Selfless mission, bring civilization, not imperialism
• But, US insists on sole sovereign control,
• And no democratization, ‘They’re not ready for it’.

Creating a systematic approach: Woodrow Wilson
Justifying war: Wilson’s liberal innovations
o Building American support for the war requires articulation of broad national
principles. So:
The United States has freedom and power to transform rules of international order
Reception of Wilson’s Fourth Points
– Themes of Wilson’s 14 points:
• (Implied: Humanity can re-invent international relations)
• End secret diplomacy
• End of empires
• Nations have a right to self-determination
• Create the League of Nations
• (The fourteen points apply more to former enemies than allies: Austria, Germany and
Turkey especially)
Global Triumph
• War is to be avoided as an instrument of policy,
• Democracy and national self-determination are the nasis of world justice of peace
Different reception at home
• America says yes to war in 1917,
• Not to international diplomacy in 1919 (The League of Nations)
• Wilson tries and fails to promote the Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations
The U.S. Senate declines to ratify the treaty of Versailles
• No disagreement with specifics of the 14 points
• Fears foreign entanglements
• Fears loss of sovereignty, freedom of choice
• Discomfort with idea of continuous engagement
• Lack of immediate necessity
Wilson’s ghost; post-war liberal consensus
– The American way, Norman Rockwell,1944
The innate goodness of people released from the disasters of dictatorship by American
Thesis: war leads to moral victory and moral re-invention
Twentieth Century Liberalism
• Emphasizes international change through normative principles: national self-rule,
human rights, free trade, anti-communism, anti-corruption,
• Expressed through international law and international institutions,
• Emphasizes problem: countries are tempted to defect,
• Great power leadership is essential to stop defection, to persuade and coerce
Immanuel Kant’s insight 1794
• International relations is not a given; it’s the rules are flexible
• We continuously change our social environment through the acts of imagining and
• To act is to affect social rules, to reaffirm or transform
• Thus, Kant’s program for perpetual peace in 1794/95 (right)
• Key: get the attitudes, rules and institutions right, and the results will be right
Liberalism, sovereignty and legitimacy
• Sovereignty prevents achieving major objectives
• It dooms international relations to conflict and minimizes mutual benefits
• Sovereignty has to be tamed
• Liberalism stresses legitimacy as an alternative source of capability and effectiveness
The power of legitimacy
• Liberalism stresses legitimacy; crucial to achieve goals
• Just as important as power, legitimacy is an alternative source of action
• Legitimacy comes from maximizing the number of engaged people the more people
involved in an activity, the more legitimate
Collective security and limits of liberal cooperation
• Cooperation is strongest in communities of shared values, shared norms
• Normative cooperation is guided by principles, not primarily for self-interest
America’s post-war liberal order: goals
• To prevent another Great Depression,
• To prevent another World War,
• To expand American power and democratic values,
• And America is willing to bear cost to prevent defection
American’s post-war liberal order: Institutional consensus
• Bretton Woods economic institutions: IMF, World Bank, World Trade Organization
• United Nations and regional organizations
• North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and other defensive alliances
• Geneva Conventions
• Arms control treaties
• North American Free Trade Agreement and the Trans-Pacific Partnership

Next: Explaining American rejection of the liberal order
Bi-partisan liberal consensus; 1947-early 1990s,
Democratic party still generally accepts the Wilsonian approach,
The republican party begin to dissent in 1990s
President Trump uniquely claims to reject the entire
Anti-Liberalism: Sympathy for suspicion
• Anti-Wilsonian doctrine emerges. Elements…
• Diplomats don’t know which side they are on.
• Foreign aid is money down a rat hole
• International law is a joke
• The UN is where dictators get treated as equals
• The World is taking advantage of American generosity
• Generally: the diplomacy of contempt for outsiders and extreme
But there also is Trump administration liberalism
• Stresses democratization of enemy stated: Cuba, North Korea, Syria
Trump administration liberalism?
• American diplomacy now emphasizes the UN
• Scene of the Trump Administration’s greatest diplomatic achievements, albeit with the
same selective emphasis on enemies
Schools of thougs approach to American
• Politics: electoral change, parties.
• Politics: changing leadership, specific individuals
• Changing elite consensus, professional beliefs
• Changing public mood, public attitudes
• The state is both a solution and a problem
• Limiting that state balances the need for power and the need to restrain power
• That state must follow rule of law and respect individual needs
• Above all, this mean inhibiting the use of force, and minimizing its effects
• Universalization of Western norms and principles regarding human rights and liberties is
the key
• Liberalism makes international politics a global project

Emphasizes international change through normative principles: national self-rule,
human rights, free trade, anti-communism, anti0corruption,

Expressed through international law and international institutions

Emphasizes problem solving through international consensus,

Biggest problem: countries
ON the other hand…..
• Anti-Wilsonian doctrine emerges. Elements……
• Diplomats don’t know which side they are on
• Foreign aid is money down a rat hole
• International law is a joke
• The UN is where dictators get treated as equals
• The world is taking advantages of American
Andrew Jackson’s revolution (President of the United State (1829-1837)
Rejecting the Abstract
• Jacksonianism is rooted in populism
• Populism rejects abstract concepts and ideas as motives in politics
• Respects the language of American principles, but not preoccupied with their role in
• Focus is on self-interests: economic, security, specific individual freedoms (not abstract
freedom or freedom for others)
• Above all, its majoritarian
Following the ultimate American = “ George Caleb Bingham, Daniel Boone Escorting Settlers
through the Cumberland Gap, 1851-52”
• Bingham shows an event from 1769
• Prototype individual frontiersman
• The individual is the superior problem solver
• The individual precedes the state
• (Gun for hunting: Boone accepted ricks)

Current US Marine Corps advertising

Prototype individual frontiersman

The individual is the superior problem solver

Ironic: Advertising a state institution by extoling the individual
Foundational elements of American populism:
• Exceptionalist: faith in innocence,
• Jeffersonian rhetorical foundation: stressing the superiority of the common man,
uneducated, unsocial
• White, rural, Evangelical protestant,
• Predominantly Southern and Western
General elements of populism

Requires opposition. Populism tends to be oppositional. It is against more than it is for.
Requires delegitimation of elites
Legitimacy belongs exclusively to the common man
Emotion and personal experience are the best guides to action
Anti-education, science and expertise (concept of over-educated)
Conservative, opposes change and seeks reaffirmation of established truth
Militaristic (in the American version) glorifying military force
• Selft-reliance
• Social equality
• Individualist
• Financially self-indulgent
• Demands simple solutions
• Distrust institutions and processes
• Stresses a folk community of shared values
• Highly pessimistic
• Honor-based community
• Defining us/them distinction
• Violence is virtuous
• Highly personalized, heroic
• Emphasis on distinguishing friends and enemies
• Rules (restraint) are for friends only
• Against enemies, anything is permitted
• Emphasis on destruction of enemies
• Suspicion of diplomacy and institutions
• Military solutions are preferable
• Total destruction of enemies insures success
• Faith in permanent solutions
Overwhelming emphasis on personal agency
• Denies structural constraints (realism)
• You have to believe in personal agency: Let the force be with you
• Tendency to highly personalize international affairs
• Problems are due to personal stupidity, personal evil, treason or deceit
• By overcoming personal evil of others, we can do anything
Andrew Jackson is back
Shifting American face of policy-making
• Extreme self-reliance, in the White House itself
• Distrust of anyone the President did nit appoint
• Rejection of the concept of a Civil Service
• Civil Service is only permitted to do routine tasks
• Diplomacy must be personally done by the President or a handful of trusted people
• Result: cannot do much diplomacy
Emphasis on non-professionals
• Populist belief that amateurs are superior to professionals,
• Example of decision to move the US embassy to Israel to Jerusalem
• No consultation with U.S. Foreign Service Officers.
• The decision was made instead by the President’s daughter Ivanka Trump and son-inlaw Jared Kushner
A more general factor: Rise of social media
• Problem of getting things done in a populist democracy
• And rise of social media politics,
• People tend to know less about what they favor,
• Crafting policy is extremely difficult
Nationalist repudiation of liberalism
• Nationalism is desirable
• Competition is desirable
• Cooperation is an illusion
• Liberalism is undesirable
Politics is Zero Sum
• For the US to win, others must lose.
• There are no mutual interests
• The United States is not exceptional,
• It follows universal rules of the international system
Crafting an agenda
• Not a typical UN speech. Emphasis on rejecting community values (liberalism and law)
• Instead, self-assertion is morally justifiable Everyone else already does it,
• International security and stability are fragile
• This justifies resort to violence,
Trump administration liberalism?
• Emphasis on diplomacy through the UN
• Trump administration’s greatest diplomatic achievements
• UN Security Council resolution on North Korea,
Why the Liberal Element?
• AK reading: Jacksonianism lacks a formula for international collaboration
• It lacks long-term goals
• It has to borrow those from other schools of thought
• AK conclusion: Jacksonianism has to meld with other approaches
• Example: George W. Bush’s switch to democracy promotion in the Middle East in 2005
• Specifically criticizing the European Union
• Implicitly supports European nationalists (Brexit), populists and Russia
• Legitimating the Trump Administration policy of retreating from multilateral and formal
• Emphasizing instead bi-lateral processes such as the dialogue with North Korea.

Hook, U.S. Foreign Policy, ch. 1.
Alexis de Tocqueville, “The manner in which…”
Reinhold Niebuhr, ‘The innocent nation in an innocent world’.
Juliana Geran Pilon, ‘Let’s take exception to the term ‘American
exceptionalism’, Wall Street Journal, 28 April 2017
Robert R. Tomes, “American exceptionalism in the Twenty-First
Century”, Survival, February-March 2014
Robert R. Tomes, “American exceptionalism in the Twenty-First
Century”, Survival, February-March 2014
Stephen Walt, ‘The myth of American exceptionalism’, Foreign
Policy, November 2011
Woodrow Wilson, ‘The ideals of America’, The Atlantic,
December 1902. Woodrow Wilson, Speech opening the campaign
for the Fourth Liberty Loan,
New York, New York, 27 September 1918.
Thomas J. Knock, “Woodrow Wilson’s internationalism and his
would-be heirs”, in The Crisis of American Foreign Policy,
Ikenberry, et al, eds, 2009, ch. 1., or Tony Smith, “From Woodrow
Wilson in 1902 to the Bush Doctrine in 2002,” International
Politics, 2011.
Walter Russell Mead, “The Jacksonian tradition and American
foreign policy,” The National Interest, Winter 1999/2000.
Walter Russell Mead, ‘The Jacksonian Revolt: American Populism
and the Liberal Order’, Foreign Affairs, 20 January 2017.
Hook, U.S. Foreign Policy, ch. 2.
The first section of this course examined national approaches or traditions shaping American
attitudes toward foreign policy. Different approaches lead in dramatically different directions.
These differences help explain America’s unpredictability in foreign affairs. In this assignment
apply course readings to explain likely directions in one particular case.
Following this assignment is a slightly shortened version of an article describing a major
foreign policy event, a speech by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. How to explain what
American leaders were trying to achieve as described there? As usual, America has a range of
choices. Different approaches will lead to different explanations and expectations.
Apply the readings covered so far (Sections I – V) to explain American goals and
expectations during this event. You have all the details you need in the course readings – Hook,
Knock, Mead, Niebuhr, Smith, de Tocqueville, Tomes, etc. – and the attached article. Apply
assigned reading thoroughly to explain:
Based on course readings how does national exceptionalism as described in class
readings-explain the event?
Based on course readings, what would be the major elements of a Wilsonian response?
How would Wilsonianism respond and why?
Based on course readings, what would be the major elements of a Jacksonian response?
How would Jacksonianism respond and why?
Which of these approaches best explains the turn in American foreign policy outlined by
Secretary of State Pompeo below, transforming America’s relationship with international
organizations? Which foreign policy approach best explains this turn and why? What
does relevance of this approach suggest for American foreign policy generally?
Respond to all parts of the assignment. Essays will be marked for explanation and application
of assigned readings, comparison of theories, analysis and resolution of assigned questions.
Your essay needs a descriptive title and summarizing introduction. Formally cite all references
to readings. Generally, the more citations, the better. Use of brief quotations from class
readings—with proper citations-is encouraged. Citations can be Chicago or MLA style. Drafts
can be submitted early for comments. Essays should be at least three single-space pages in length.
Higher grades usually require greater length,
The New York Times
Pompeo Questions the Val