U.S. foreign policy

See also: History of U.S. foreign policy

Ultimate responsibility for United States foreign policy rests with the President of the United States. For the ratification of formal treaties, he or she must obtain the advice and consent of the Senate.

In the modern practice of foreign policy, formally, the senior foreign policy official below the President is the U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. In practice, the critical decisionmakers are the members of the National Security Council, which includes the Secretary of State. Other major influencers are in the National Security Council staff, headed by the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, James Jones. The U.S. Department of Defense, under Secretary Robert Gates, obviously has a major effect, as does the United States intelligence community, coordinated by Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair.

Foreign policy formulation and execution is structured on regional and functional areas. Over recent years, there has been an attempt to reconcile the regional definitions of the various departments and agencies, so a country is not under one bureau of the State Department but under a different Unified Combatant Command in the military. This is not completely successful; the countries of the Mediterranean littoral as well as the Levant are under one Assistant Secretary of State, but the United States European Command is responsible for the former but the United States Central Command for the latter.

Foreign policy also needs to be considered in relation to the U.S. and world situation of the time.

Regional

Africa

U.S African policy is principally focused on the Subsaharan part of the continent. For reasons of colonial sensitivity, the United States Africa Command is considered a unified subcommand of United States European Command.

East Asia and Pacific

North Korea is the hot spot, and the U.S. regional priority is to insist on the Six-Party Talks, which also recognize China as a key broker.

Near East

More than in most areas in the world, policies twist and turn and involve multiple countries. Nevertheless, there are some basic principles both for the region and for countries.

Egypt

While the U.S. continues to provide major economic support to Egypt, there is increasing concern about succession, with President Hosni Mubarrak reported to be in poor health.

Iran

The Obama administration avoids the military threats implied by the previous administration, by the U.S. or others. While it is giving moral encouragement to the domestic protesters following the 2009 election, it is taking time, establishing a moral position, and waiting on events. It does appear to be holding back on direct engagement at any high level.

It is quite serious about pressuring Iran to stop what is seen as a nuclear weapons program, b as the best means to accomplish this goal. Instead, a consensus is growing, with allies, to use economic warfare, targeted at Iran's lack of internal petroleum refining capacity, and thus, while ironically an oil producer, a gasoline importer.

Iraq

See also: Iraq War

South and Central Asia

Afghanistan and Pakistan

In many respects, it sees this as one problem; the political geography of the area also supports the argument that the Durand Line border between the two may have been convenient for the British, but does not reflect the boundaries of the Pashtun people.

Functional

A number of these areas will definitely involve more agencies than the Department of State.

• International Organization Affairs (IO)

Security

• Counterterrorism
• Peace operations
• Arms Control
• International Security and Nonproliferation (ISN)

Economic

• Foreign assistance
• Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs(E)
• Economic, Energy and Business Affairs (EEB)
• National Marine Fisheries Service

Democracy promotion and information

• Democracy and Global Affairs (G)
• Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs (R)
• International Information Programs (IIP)
• Propaganda; Voice of Americz; Broadcasting Board of Governors, psychological operations staff, National Clandestine Service, Central Intelligence Agency

Cultural

• Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA)

Law enforcement, including drug trade

• International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL)
• Drug Enforcement Administration
• Federal Bureau of Investigation
• War Crimes Issues (S/WCI)
• Office of Special Investigations, U.S. Department of Justice

Human Rights

• Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM)
• Global Women's Issues (S/GWI)

Science

• Global AIDS Coordinator, Office of (S/GAC)
• Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs (OES)
• National Science Foundation
• National Institutes of Health
• Centers for Disease Control
• National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration

Doctrines

• Monroe Doctrine [r]: Add brief definition or description
• Containment policy [r]: A U.S. foreign policy doctrine of the Cold War, begun in 1947, focusing on keeping Communist nations "contained" from further expansion, rather than direct confrontation ^[e]
• American exceptionalism [r]: Add brief definition or description

Time periods

Cold War

Initial containment

Based on concepts from diplomat George Kennan, the U.S. began, in the Truman Administration, a "containment policy", which affected U.S. policy throughout the Cold War. Kennan's basic hypothesis was that the Soviet ideology convinced them that their cause was historically preordained to win, so, while they might seem bellicose, they were actually risk-averse and would eventually pull back in confrontations. As a result, it was U.S. policy to strengthen the rest of the world against Communism, with military bases on the borders and in threatened areas, and economic, psychological and political support to nations threatened by Communism.

The Marshall Plan was the largest economic effort. Arguably, the Berlin Blockade was the first, limited military confrontation, where American logistical and industrial power could prevail.

Political Islam and other revolutionary forces

Multilateralism

A multilateralist foreign policy was a strong plank in the campaign platform of Barack Obama. Many have argued the very early award of the Nobel Peace Prize was less for any specific action than being "not-Bush", especially in the view of Europeans.

Several conservatives, associated and not associated with neoconservatism, rejected it. Francis Fukuyama broke away from neoconservatism with his book America at the Crossroads: Democracy, Power, and the Neoconservative Legacy,

Andrew Bacevich, discussing Fukuyama 's thoughts on "neoconservatism and successor doctrines" found trends, at least before Obama, based in Wilsonian ambition and Wilsonian certainty, but with a "pronounced affinity for the sword." He regards Ronald Reagan as Wilson's truest disciple, as one who meant to put America on the right side of history, and that Bill Clinton there was a continuation of the idea that there was no alternative to democracy. Even George W. Bush was a product of a Wilsonian revival. The difference was that mainstream politicians treat American military supremacy as an unmitigated good and an evidence of American exceptionalism. Where there were six major military actions abroad between 1945 and 1986, they became almost annual after the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Zbigniew Brzezinski counseled a policy of self-restraint and not pressing every advantage, and listening to other nations.

Technology has made global "have-nots" painfully conscious of their relative deprivation. It has also given them the tools to punish those they see as blocking their aspirations. If the United States is to avoid becoming the target of their resentment, its foreign policy must be seen as serving their interests as well as its own. That means exercising self-restraint rather than pressing every advantage that comes to a superpower; it means listening to others and not just working to preserve our own peace and prosperity but helping others to build their own.

Others have described technology as both a strength and liability. In The Pentagon's New Map, Thomas P.M. Barnett saw "connecting to the core" as essential in reducing conflict in poor nations.

There had been considerable sympathy, after 9/11, for the Afghanistan War (2001-), but the Iraq War was largely seen as U.S. unilateralism.