Liberation of Iraq according to the major schools of American foreign policy

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Isolationism
Liberal internationalism
Realism
Democratic globalism
Democratic realism
Works Cited

Introduction

Isolationism, liberal internationalism, realism, democratic globalism and democratic realism are considered to be the major schools of American foreign policy. The schools differ fundamentally on issues on foreign policy with the intervention of America in Iraq being an ideal paradigm of the polarity within these schools of American foreign policy.

Often termed as the American “liberation” of Iraq, the ongoing conflict in Iraq has been a significant event that has ensured the incessant disputation between the main foreign policy principles as the American government attempts to install an autonomous government in Iraq. This essay aims to discuss the perception of the major schools of American foreign policy with regard to the intervention of America in Iraq.

Isolationism

This foreign policy integrates Non-interventionism with Protectionism compelling the political leadership to evade binding agreements with other nations and war is only used in defending territory. In addition, this policy controls trade between states through government regulations that discourage imports and prevent capture of indigenous markets and businesses by foreigners (Radosh 6).

Isolationists are opposed to the invasion of Iraq thus argue that the United States is acting according to the will of oil corporations and actually consider the access to Iraqi oil fields as the sole stimulus for U.S. incursion (Krauthammer 1).

Furthermore, the number of civilian deaths caused by the tactical bombing and armed invasion of Iraq by the U.S have been more than the fatalities caused by Saddam Hussein’s actions. According to Radosh, isolationists also view the ongoing American liberation of Iraq as a form of neo-imperialism where America is acting to control the international trade and investment models as well as advance its global interests while limiting the influence of its competitors (Radosh 8).

Liberal internationalism

The liberal internationalism international policy asserts that liberal nations should have the authority to intercede in other self-governing nations either through the armed forces or charitable support in order to accomplish its liberal goals (Engle 4). Supporters of this policy agree with the ongoing American liberation of Iraq stating that the involvement of America in the creation of a new Iraqi government has brought about a new form of democracy in Iraq (Engle 5).

In addition, Iraq has had problems regarding the rights of women for a long time. Women were treated in an inferior capacity and according to former president George W. Bush, restoration of human rights was one of the main objectives of the invasion (Holsti 67).

Liberal internationalists also argue that Iraq was suspected to not only be holding weapons of mass destruction but harboring and funding terrorists as well (Krauthammer 2). According to this foreign policy, it was necessary for America to intervene in order to guarantee the security of the Middle East as well as the security of U.K and American citizens (Engle 7).

Realism

This is a school of American foreign policy that gives precedence to national interest and security over principles, ethical concerns and social reforms thus nations endeavor to acquire as many resources as possible in tow with its pursuit for national security (Krauthammer 2). The policy further asserts that the international system is persistently in a state of disorder hence national actions are influenced by the national interests which are national security and continued and thriving existence.

This school of American foreign policy is an invariable adherent of the ongoing American liberation of Iraq for several reasons. The primary reason was that President Bush was widely quoted to have said that regime change in Iraq was a priority for the American government hence any scenario that did not lead to the ousting of Saddam’s government would make the U.S appear weak(Holsti 63). The ongoing American liberation of Iraq is reinforcement to the U.S. reputation for keenness to use might to achieve its national interests.

Realism would also put Iraq as America’s prime target due to Iraq’s geostrategic position which encroaches on numerous U.S national security interests as well as to Iraq’s copious oil revenues, which could be positioned to rival U.S. interests(Lieberfeld 8).

Realists also argue that the presence of U.S military bases in Iraq would facilitate the U.S. with the capacity to expand its influence into the Middle East, Central Asia, and Africa (Holsti 66). Furthermore, Israel being one of the key allies of the United States was under constant threat from Middle East nations such as Iran, Syria and Palestine and America’s presence in Iraq increases Israel’s security (Lieberfeld 4).

The U.S has also been able to control the Palestinian insurgents who were suspected of procuring resources and weapons used against Israel from Iraq hence furthering its agenda of establishing an Israeli-Palestinian accord that is satisfactory to Israel.

The ongoing American liberation of Iraq also situates U.S. military and U.S. bases close to Afghanistan and Iran which are considered terrorist hubs, in order to facilitate the collection of intelligence and have military units nearby in case of an armed offensive against hostile governments (Krauthammer 2-3).

Democratic globalism

This policy asserts that the interests of the entire globe and the equal representation of each nation on the worldwide landscape are more important than the interests of individual nations. This policy however has a provision for the use of economic and military might by the U.S to instill democracy and human liberty to other nations (Lieberfeld 10). Supporters of this policy are of the view that the ongoing American liberation of Iraq is not justified since none of the global interests are met.

According to democratic globalist, America’s presence in Iraq only servers the interests of America while the citizens of Iraq and many other middle east nations suffer either in the hands of American troops or extremist insurgents.

Selective Democratic globalism however consents the influence America has over Iraq mainly due to the abundant oil reserves the nation holds which are essential in facilitating the American objective of Middle East democratization (Lieberfeld 10). In addition, global terror has its kernel in the Middle East with Iraq being a former sponsor of the vice. The democratization of that region will help in the reduction, identification and destruction of terrorist cells from a global perspective.

Democratic realism

According to Krauthammer (3), this foreign policy supposes the “targeted, focused and limited”, intervention of the U.S in specific regions where the protection and expansion of sovereignty is important to the outcome of the greater war against the current adversary. Since the current enemy to the U.S is Arab/Islamic radicalism, then the Middle East becomes the targeted region for Democratic realism (Lieberfeld 12).

This policy has been regarded as highly efficient by democratic realists who argue that democratic globalism is likely to stretch thin America’s resources and thus such targeted intervention is less costly (Krauthammer 3). In terms of strategy, Iraq is close to most of the nations considered to foster terrorism such as Afghanistan, Iran and Palestine hence the existence of U.S military power in this region is crucial for tactical offensives against Arab/Islamic radicalism.

In my view the Isolationism school of foreign policy is the one that is used by the US in the liberation of Iraq, because what was initially the reason for the US to invade Iraq was found not to be true and that the Bush’s administration used propaganda so as for some few individuals in the US administration to foster their interest on Iraq.

Works Cited

Engle, Karen. Liberal internationalism, Feminism, and the Suppression of Critique: Contemporary Approaches to Global Order in the United States. Harvard International Law Journal, Vol.46, No.2, pp. 1-14, 2005.

Holsti, Ole. Public opinion and American foreign policy. Michigan: University of Michigan Press. 2004. Print.

Krauthammer, Charles. In Defense of Democratic Realism. 2004. Web.

Lieberfeld, Daniel. Theories of conflict and the Iraq war. 2005. Web.

Radosh, Ronald. Isolationism Strikes Again. History News Network, 2003. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!