Interest Presentation

The US Foreign Policy under Bush’s Administration

The United States of America has witnessed the most crucial time of history since 2001 since it has been engaged with war on terror. In such a critical phase, the US was ruled by two Presidents: George W. Bush and George H.W Bush. Each one had his different views concerning the foreign policy of the country. The US foreign policy is formulated based on its relationship with the foreign nations, and the way it sets its relations with international organizations. This report will analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the foreign policy of the US under the Bush administration.

There is a school of thought that views President George W. Bush to be successful in the context of the war on terror. President George W. Bush has ruled the country during the most critical time of history of the USA. Bush administration had taken certain policy measures that ensured the US hegemony of the globe. That is, President Bush, defined the world order to be uni-polar in the Bush Doctrine. This can be attributed to the great success of the US foreign policy that it has attained the position of the sole superpower of the world, and since then the US foreign policy is formulated accordingly so that it could maintain its hegemony over the world. One can say that in the wake of the 9/11 attacks on the twin towers in the US, the US has launched the global war on terror by violating the United Nations Security Council resolution. That is the US did not even comply with international norms and laws provided under the UN Charter. Consequently, the Security Council had to pass the UNSC resolution 1373 against terrorism in 2001 (United Nations Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee, 2021). It implies that the US exercises its influence not only on sovereign nations but also on international political organizations. Another aspect that shows the success of the foreign policy of the US under the Bush administration is that it had waged a war against Iraq in 2003 in an attempt to promote democracy. The point is it is in the core interests of the US foreign policy to promote liberal values of democracy all across the world (Cox, 2018). The basic objective of the Bush Doctrine was to identify the connection between democracy, liberalism, and security to influence the defense and foreign policy of the US. And this was successfully attained under the Bush administration.

There is another school of thought that believes the foreign policy of the US has been proving to have flaws because the time has changed now, while the foreign policy has not been involved from conservative approach. The point is till the time, the US economy was not hurting, Bush's foreign policy was all success for the US, but the changing scenario of the world presents an opposite picture. One must not forget that the changing world order has become a serious concern for the status of the sole superpower of the world because the trade competition in the world has been rising, particularly between the US and China. As per the official record, the war on terrorism has been the most expensive war of US history as it had cost nearly 1 Trillion US Dollars. The point is global politics have been evolving, and the world has gone economic conscious, and sovereign nations try to avert wars. Moreover, humans have developed consciousness and awareness regarding their rights. So, the actions of the US regarding invading the nations have become hard to justify now. Because one can see by the situation of Afghanistan that it has been more than two decades passed and the peace cannot be seen as restored. Furthermore, the US foreign policy would not be the same irrespective of the outcomes of the war on terrorism. One can see by the present-day foreign policy of the US that the initial impact of the 9/11 tragedy has started to fade away. Since, the country wants to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan under the peace deal signed by the Taliban and the Kabul government in Doha on February 29, 2020. However, because of the violation of the terms and conditions of the peace deal by the Taliban, peace in Afghanistan would be hard to achieve, and there are likely chances that the US would not evacuate from Afghanistan. So, the US foreign policy would always reinvigorate the engagement of the US in global affairs.

Going ahead, it is believed that US policymakers have been comparing the 9/11 attacks with the attack on Pearl Harbor within the first hour of the attack. This comparison was being made because of the massive killings of US nationals. However, there was no vulnerability of the US as it was in the case of a clash with Japan. Thereby, it can be said that the minds who were framing the foreign policy of the US must have considered the use of nukes to contain terrorism. This was one of the main reasons that the US had violated international law by violating the sovereignty of Afghanistan. Moreover, this particular concern of the US policymakers was legit in the sense that the US has become the sole superpower of the world after disintegrating the Soviet Union in the Second World War. Therefore, it was the duty of the US to frame the global order by maintains peace in the international world. Moreover, after the Second World War, the top priority of the US foreign policy was to contain communism. And the world has seen that how the incident of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962 has taken the two rivals on the verge of nuclear war. The result of the cold war led the US to be the winner and becoming the sole superpower of the world. The same can be seen in the case of the war on terrorism. The main aim of the US is to promote democracy in the world and to contain the threat of terrorism. It has been more than two decades, since the US has been engaged in the war on terror, and ultimately leading to a peace deal that has been signed between the Taliban and the government of Afghanistan under the leadership of the Zalmay Khalilzad on behalf of the US government. So, this could be stated as the success of the US foreign policy so far.

On the flip side, it would be too soon to say that the US foreign policy remained flawless. The 9/11 attacks have a great opportunity on one hand, and a great risk for transatlantic relations on the other hand. That is it would a great opportunity for the US to reconsolidate an Alliance whose was in fray in the absence of common threat, only if the US would have carefully managed the war on terror and avoided provoking a clash of civilizations by staying in collaboration with the European allies (Lee, 2016). As the sympathy of the Europeans after the 9/11 attacks was genuine and real, and the population on both sides have become more conscious about the common threat of terrorism. On the contrary, the US would lose the support of the Europeans if it would ignore the international concerns about preemptive strikes and assuming the righteousness of its actions. So, this can be viewed as a narrow path to tread because the war on terrorism has been fraught with various complexities and without having any easy options. However, the stakes of the US concerning its relations with Europe have not been much higher. Besides, the tragedy of 9/11 was unfortunate because it acted like adding fuel to the fire to the expansionist’s design of the US. That is soon after invading Afghanistan on September 11, 2001; the US invaded Iraq in 2003 and toppled the government of Saddam Hussain. This invasion was based on Article 51 of the UN Charter that provides the right to self-defense. So, the misuse of article 51 was again a violation of international law as the UN did not accede to the US invasion in Iraq and the US did it unilaterally as it did in the case of Afghanistan in 2001. So this policy of George W. Bush posed threats to Jews and Americans in the Middle East, and consequently, it led to the emergence of several non-state actors that did not pacify the situation, rather it further exacerbated the situation (Kattelman, 2019).

To sum up, foreign policy is the agenda of a state to serve its national interests by maintaining relations with foreign nations. The US needed to formulate the world order being the victor of the Second World War. Thereby, the foreign policy of George H.W Bush has been regarded as more counseling because it was more complying with international norms and was adherent to globalism. While, the foreign policy of Junior Bush was based on more nationalistic views, and it has been regarded as the most conservative because it has repeatedly violated international norms because of the unilateral decisions being taken by President George W. Bush. Besides, the Bush policy has remained somewhat flaws in terms of economics because its impacts have still been faced by the world.

References

Cox, M. (2018). Safeguarding democratic capitalism: US foreign policy and national security, 1920–2015. Cold War History, 1-2. https://doi.org/10.1080/14682745.2018.1533687

Kattelman, K. (2019). Assessing success of the Global War on Terror: terrorist attack frequency and the backlash effect. Dynamics Of Asymmetric Conflict, 13(1), 67-86. https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2019.1650384

Lee, M. (2016). Us, them, and the war on terror: reassessing George W. Bush’s rhetorical legacy. Communication And Critical/Cultural Studies, 14(1), 3-30. https://doi.org/10.1080/14791420.2016.1257817

United Nations Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee. (2021). Counter-Terrorism Committee - United Nations Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee. United Nations Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee. Retrieved 2 March 2021, from https://www.un.org/sc/ctc/.