OBSERVATIONS ON THE POWER SHIFTS, HISTORY, AND DOMESTIC POLITICS

OF AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY

Michael Watts
mjwatts1983@gmail.com
Enterline
PSCI 4830.001: American Foreign Policy
12 December 2013

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.

INTRODUCTION

II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.

SIMULATION
POWER
HISTORY
DOMESTIC POLITICS
CONCLUSION
WORKS CITED

I. INTRODUCTION

The view of American Foreign Policy (AFP) among the general population is viewed as
the Departments of State and Ambassadors to foreign counties, the Department of Defense and
the Pentagon, and the Central Intelligence Agency along with their interactions with foreign

governments both consisting of allies and rivals. Those government entities along with their
historical derivatives have played a role in the various power roles between the United States and
other countries, shaping American history, and impacting domestic politics.
One of the reasons why Americans feel that AFP is foreign is because of the disconnect
between the civilian and military population. Speaking from personal experience as a Navy
veteran, the 2000s were a different decade for those in America's armed forces compared to the
rest of the civilian population. News programs rarely cover the Afghanistan War as much
anymore unless it is the holidays, there is a policy shift, or mass casualties of combatants.
According to New York Times media critic David Carr in 2008, "America (is) at peace with being
at war (Maddow, 246)" because it is something that no one is willing to talk about anymore.
Understanding AFP leads to a better understanding of the aspects of power, history, and domestic
politics and how they play a role in impacting the American citizenry.

II. SIMULATION

These three aspects played roles in the simulation conducted in an AFP class during the
fall 2013 semester at the University of North Texas in Denton, TX. Students were divided into
two worlds each containing the following factions: the United States, Ruchina, Angolina, and

Angolina Rebels. The only real country in this simulation was the United States. Per the handout
delivered by the instructor, a crisis has developed involving the various factions. Angolina is
described as an African country divided by a civil war driven by sectarian violence between a
minority ethnic group (Golas) based in the capitol city (Angolina City) and a majority ethnic
group (Annalinas) based in the eastern and southern portion of the country. At stake was control
of Angolina's oil reserves as indicated by a map provided by the instructor. Ruchina is described
as an emerging global power in the region with trying to resolve the Angolina Civil War, gain
access to Angolina's resources, and undermining American interests. American interests in the
conflict was to find a solution that ended the Angolina Civil War along with stopping a potential
spread of violence into neighboring nations in the region, and similar to Ruchina find a way to
undermine the powerful and gain access to the oil reserves. In addition to the main handout, each
faction was given their own private information with instructions to keep amongst the group
members. Upon the completion of the simulation, the instructor provided students with all
information concerning the factions in order to generate a well documented research paper.

III. POWER

For the purpose of the simulation the paper's author was placed in the World Two
Ruchina faction along with two other students and we presented Ruchina as a country as a sort of
oligarchic rule, similar to Venezuela when it was operating under the rule of Hugo Chavez. Our

group expressed that we wanted democracy in Angolina as well, but preferred a country with a
strong alliance towards Ruchina. If it meant establishing a Ruchina-style government in
Angolina City, that was the outcome. Ending the civil war in Angolina was a priority because of
the risk to Ruchina's power in the region. There was concern that the Angolina Civil War could
spark conflict in the neighboring countries of Surinamia, Zangeria, Tunisiana, Nambabwe, and
Ghanambia, and then eventually reaching Ruchina similar to the Arab Spring protests that took
place across Northern Africa and the Middle East in 2011 that led to the overthrow of Libya's
Muhamar Qadiffi, the constant changing power structure in Egypt, and the Syrian Civil War.
Interesting enough no one thought that this sounded similar to what Eisenhower said in 1954
about countries falling into the Soviet sphere of influence where "(y)ou have a row of dominoes
set up, you knock over the first one, and... the last one... will go over very quickly. So you have a
... disintegration that would have the most profound interest (Gaddis, 123)." It was
understandable why Ruchina was concerned about the potential of the conflict escalating because
it would threaten our interest in remaining the region's primary influence and draw in other
interests, specifically the United States.
Our group offered to the Golas that Ruchina was willing to aid them in their fight against
the Annalinas. Our group shared a similar interest with the Golas in keeping the United States
out and from infiltrating their country even though we had our own motives of infiltrating the
country. The Ruchina government offered a trade agreement in regards to their oil reserves if we
were to side with the Golas. The deal was a 60-40 Ruchina split of the oil production with a tax
imposed on Angolina for using our ships and in return Angolina would keep 95% of the profits
while we built a pipeline from Angolina to the north through our ally Surinamia. We also
explored what the other factions had to offer in the conflict. The Annalinas established

themselves as the Peoples Republic of Angolina and were seeking secession from Angolina, but
they were open to concessions such as re-entering negotiations with the Golas and find a
conciliatory solution to the conflict. Even though a pro-democratic government was
contradictory to our plans to extract Angolina's resources, a resolution would keep the United
States out of the conflict. The United States expressed their willingness to stay out of the
Angolina Civil War as well, but Ruchina knew the United States shared a similar interest in
expanding their power and influence in the region because of our role as powerful nations. While
the United States has the diplomatic, economic, and military power that establishes it as a
superpower and Ruchina was an emerging regional power, our country could hold its own if
needed to.
Instead of accepting our trade offer, the Golas agreed to enter into multi-party party talks
between the United States, Ruchina, and the Annalinas. While the trade agreement might have
been beneficial for the Golas in achieving their goal of reunifying the country and our similar
interest in keeping the American influence out of the region, they probably felt that having
Ruchina influence in their power structure was not beneficial for the long term. As established in
the handout given by the instructor, Angolina had a history of colonial influence and it is implied
had a short period as their own independent nation. Angolina autonomy took precedence over
reunification if it meant possible subjugation by another power. Perhaps improving on the
economic power aspect of the proposed agreement by making the deal better for Angolina such
as tying a time table removing military support to the oil production profits. For certain time
period Ruchina remains in Angolina, they lose a certain percentage of the oil profits which would
have given Ruchina an incentive in keeping their involvement as short as possible.

Instead of the conflict being contained in the region with Ruchina as the lead power
broker, the power shifted over to the alliance consisting of the United States and the newly
created People's Republic of Angolina. The negotiations gave the People's Republic of Angolina
the time to launch a westward offensive toward Angolina City and the United States leverage in
the power brokerage aspect of AFP.

IV. HISTORY

Throughout the history of the United States foreign policy has played an influential part
shaping presidents and determining policy for future administrations. In 1796, George

Washington delivered in his farewell address that "Tis our true policy to steer clear of permanent
Alliances, with any portion of the foreign world." While Washington was warning about getting
involved in foreign affairs, he also recognized that there was an appropriate time for Americans
to step onto the global stage. Territories in the first century of American history were annexed by
strokes of the pen such as Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase, by the force such as the American
Southwest and California in the Mexican-American War, or in the case of Texas, a campaign
promise.
The earliest venture into AFP caused many disputes. The expanding nation was creating
tensions both at home and abroad on the frontier front. Domestically AFP came into conflict the
one subject that dominated American politics for its first 75 years: slavery. The acquisition of
new territory was a blessing and a curse because it would grow the nation but also rekindle the
debate about whether slavery should continue or cease to exist. The other conflict was with the
Native American tribes encountered during westward expansion. Though various treaties were
signed with tribes, most often they were broken. One such example was the forceful relocation of
the Cherokee from the southeastern United States to present-day Oklahoma under orders from
Andrew Jackson.
Modern AFP was established by James Monroe issuing the Monroe Doctrine declaring
the Western Hemisphere off limits to European nations. This established a new precedence of
American global presence of varying degrees. Theodore Roosevelt physically displayed this
presence by deploying the Great White Fleet on a 14-month global deployment as part of his
"Speak Softly and Carry a Big Stick" foreign policy. In April 1917 Woodrow Wilson backed out
of his re-election promise to keep out of the European conflict. Franklin Roosevelt appeared to
follow that same idea by staying out of another European conflict until the attack on Pearl

Harbor, HI by the Imperial Japanese Navy on 7 December 1941 forced the nation into another
global conflict. World War II's conclusion led to the Soviet Union emerging as a competing
global power that shaped the foreign policy of presidents from Harry S. Truman to George H.W.
Bush over a period of 50 years. The collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the 1980s lead to
the United States being the lone global superpower and entering an unprecedented new dynamic.
Bill Clinton became the first president elected in the post-Cold War era along with his
predecessors, George W. Bush and President Barack Obama, dealing with their own specific
foreign policy issues of varying degrees in how to maintain American presence with the rise of
traditional and new global powers.
Three presidents came to mind during the simulation about why the United States felt
inclined to intervene in the Angolina Civil War. Lincoln felt the eradication of slavery was a
higher calling as based in the Declaration of Independence (Kagan). Wilson believed he was
answering Washington's call to "safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary
emergencies" when he brought the nation into World War I (Kennedy). Ronald Reagan felt he
was doing the same thing when it came to confronting the Soviet Union and communism
(Gaddis). It is understandable why the United States felt the need to intervene in the simulated
conflict because of the ideals that are ingrained in their government. From the perspective of
Ruchina, American intervention was another example of them flexing their imperialistic muscles
where it was not needed and that this was within Ruchina's sphere of influence. While both
countries wanted an end to conflict in Angolina how that end was achieved was a conflict of
ideals and both sides lost sight of the bigger picture which was ending the Angolina Civil War.

V. DOMESTIC POLITICS

It is not uncommon for AFP to dominate domestic politics as it has regularly in the 21st
century. AFP has been at the forefront of four presidential elections and at least two mid-term

10

congressional elections. In hotly contested 2000 election, then-Texas Governor George W. Bush
adopted "key themes from Jeffersonian and Jacksonian ideas, speaking in the (presidential)
campaign of the need for the United States to lower its profile, to walk more 'humbly,' and to
move back to a narrower and more restricted view of national interests (Mead, 176)." Less than
eight months after his inauguration, the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 on high profile
domestic targets vaulted the Bush presidency into the foreign policy realm. In the 2002
congressional mid-term elections, Republicans campaigned on a platform stating they were best
suited to protect the country from future attacks. By 2004, Bush was a wartime president
conducting operations in two different countries and won re-election in both the electoral college
and popular vote. The increasing unpopularity of the Iraq War was one of the reasons why
Democrats regained control of Congress in 2006. Democrats nominated a candidate in the 2008
election who stated at the start of the Iraq War he didn't oppose all wars, but rather opposed
dumb wars. That candidate was then-Illinois Senator Barack Obama. In the recent presidential
election held in 2012, President Obama countered Republican candidate Mitt Romney's claim the
Navy was its smallest since 1917 with the line, "there are these things called aircraft carriers,
where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines." The
line exposed Romney's lack of knowledge when it came to the issue of America's military
strength and might.
Elections have consequences is a common phrase uttered in domestic politics as there are
many more examples of AFP playing a role in this realm. Every two years there are elections for
federal office. While it is believed that the president is in charge of foreign policy, the Congress
is in charge of things such as raising revenues, generating budgets, and declaring war. The
Secretaries of State and Defense have to be confirmed by the Senate as those are cabinet level

11

offices. It is apparent that in the simulation the United States has gotten its domestic agenda in
order (Haass). Standing for pro-democratic reforms in foreign policy is difficult when in the
United States barely 60% turnout for presidential elections along with lines of up to 8 hours to
cast a ballot in some places and a coordinated effort by one political party to keep certain groups
from voting.
Another observation is that the simulation reports coming from the United States was that
Congress was conducting public hearings on the Angolina Civil War which is a far departure
from precedent started under Johnson with how he relied heavily on the draft and less on the
reserve forces to conduct military operations in Vietnam to Reagan's illegal secret funding of
wars in Central America and becoming entwined in the Iran-Contra affair to the W. Bush
Administration deceiving the public into the Iraq War through false claims of Iraq owning
weapons of mass destruction (Maddow). In September 2013 President Obama could have easily
ordered military strikes on targets in Syria after discovering their usage of chemical weapons in
their civil war in Obama's role as Commander-in-Chief and with enough established precedent to
do so, but the president chose restraint and to debate the issue with Congress. The American
people through Congress were not very supportive of military action given events over the last
twelve years and the complicated nature of the conflict. Instead a diplomatic solution was sought
through the United Nations and other allies to where Syria had to surrender their chemical
weapons. President Obama's departure of the nearly 50 years of precedent of that military action
should be handled by the few in the executive branch and ceding control back to framer's intent
of military action taking place in the legislative branch (Maddow) will play a role in future AFP
issues. In the simulation this new precedent played a role in that it appeared that the United
States and Ruchina were not willing to engage in armed conflict. The United States because of

12

the obvious domestic consequences concerning elections, but also Ruchina had their own
domestic concerns as well. Even though Ruchina did not have pro-democratic leanings, the
regime in this fictitious country had to be concerned about uprisings that could lead to the
possible violent overthrow of those in power. The United States in this simulation exhibited
strong Wilsonian ideals of exporting democracy abroad, but also the Jacksonian idea of results
and holding those accountable along with some Jeffersonian belief of restraint and adhering to
the Constitution (Mead, 336-37).

VII. CONCLUSION

Similar to the simulation, events took place that impacted the outcome. A winter weather
event struck the Dallas-Fort Worth area that not only canceled the final simulation session and
debriefing portion of the project which would have led to a better analysis of the exercise, but

13

also led to the university being shut down for nearly a week due to prolonged icy conditions.
Even though the project encouraged the use of social media, it is not the same as physically
interacting with other members of the assigned world in the classroom environment where one
can measure the body language of those involved along with the tone and other expressions of
those involved. In the final session before the weather interrupted regularly scheduled classes,
there was an event where the United States along with their new allies, the People's Republic of
Angolina, issued demands to the Ruchina-Angolina alliance. In a show of strength, the United
States-People's Republic of Angolina alliance physically surrounded the Ruchina-Angolina
alliance sitting at their desks with their demands to cease hostilities in the Angolina Civil War.
From the prospective of the Ruchina government, it was intimidating. In casual discussions with
members of the group that employed that tactic after class dismissed, I mentioned it was a useful
and wanted to express there was no hard feelings in employing that strategy as a sign of
professionalism.
It also moved the Ruchina government to a sobering position and a critical point in their
involvement in this simulated conflict. Based on recent events, Ruchina was no longer in a
position to exercise their demands for power and faced a decision: continue supporting the
Angolina government or join with the People's Republic of Angolina. Supporting the weakening
Angolina government had its risks in that Ruchina would end up being left out of the postAngolina Civil War plans to influence policies and extract their oil reserves. Joining with the
United States-led alliance supporting the rebel forces might have given the United States an entry
way into the region and weakened Ruchina's influence, but there might be a place for Ruchina in
the post-war environment which would be better long term in their pursuit in becoming the
regional power. While escalating the conflict might have given some power to Ruchina in the

14

short term, it could have led to the United States deploying forces and not won the emerging
nation too many friends internationally in the overall grand scheme of things.
There will be future Angolina Civil War type situations that might rise up and will require
different tactics. The United States and Iran are currently undergoing discussions on how to deal
with that country's nuclear energy program and potential normalization of relationships for the
first time in a generation. The ongoing Arab Spring protests have taken place in Libya, Egypt,
and Syria. One day it might spread to Saudi Arabia, an oil rich nation but ruled by a family with
tight controls over the behaviors of their female citizens. Due to long standing rivalries, India
and Pakistan is a situation that could figuratively and literally turn nuclear if wise persons are
unable to negotiate a sensible resolution. The concerns about Russia's harsh treatment of their
lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) citizens is a concern along with President
Vladimir Putin's tight control over dissent is creating controversy over the Winter Olympic
games slated to be held in Sochi this coming February. The largest nation in the world population
wise, China, adheres to the communist system but appears to have relaxed to allow some
capitalist influences. If pro-democratic reforms were to happen, it would require a lot of skill and
mastery to guide that nation into becoming the largest democracy in known history.
Future AFP situations will require people with the in depth knowledge of history, the
various domestic politics at stake in this country and the nations involved in the situation, and
most importantly knowing what the power relationships between the various groups to discover a
sensible solution that prevent situations from escalating out of control. The first major AFP event
after the collapse of the Soviet Union event was the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in August 1990.
George H.W. Bush recognized the rapidly changing global environment and the unique role the
United States was in being the lone superpower saying how the "world (is) quite different that

15

the one we've known. A world where the rule of law supplants the rule of the jungle. A world in
which nations recognized the shared responsibility for freedom and justice" (Maddow, 129).
Policy makers in AFP will have to adhere to that they are in unique times where the world is a
different place than they observed previously and determine how to navigate though so that
future generations have that same opportunity.

VII. WORKS CITED

Carr, David. "The Wars We Choose to Ignore." The New York Times. The New York Times
Company, 26 May 2008. Web. 9 Dec. 2013.

16

<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/26/business/media/26carr.html?
pagewanted=all&_r=0>.

DeYoung, Karen. "Iran Nuclear Deal Could Complicate Other U.S. Foreign Policy Efforts in the
Middle East." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 25 Nov. 2013. Web. 9 Dec. 2013.
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/iran-nuclear-deal-couldcomplicate-other-us-foreign-policy-efforts-in-the-middle-east/2013/11/24/6c4eb1265538-11e3-8304-caf30787c0a9_story.html>.

Enterline, Andrew. Simulation: Conflict In Angolina. Handout and associated documents

provided by instructor.

"FULL TRANSCRIPT: President Obama's Sept. 10 Speech on Syria." Washington Post. N.p., 10
Sept. 2013. Web. 12 Dec. 2013. <http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-0910/politics/41939044_1_chemical-weapons-poison-gas-sarin-gas/2>.

Gaddis, John Lewis. The Cold War: A New History. New York: Penguin, 2005. Print.

Hafezi, Parisa, and Justyna Pawlak. "Breakthrough Deal Curbs Iran's Nuclear Activity." Reuters.
Thomson Reuters, 24 Nov. 2013. Web. 9 Dec. 2013.
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/24/us-iran-nuclearidUSBRE9AI0CV20131124>.

17

Haass, Richard. Foreign Policy Begins at Home: The Case for Putting America's House in Order.
New York: Basic, 2013. Print.

Kennedy, David M. Over Here: The First World War and American Society. Oxford, UK: Oxford
UP, 2004. Print.

Kagan, Robert. Dangerous Nation. New York: Knopf, 2006. Print.

Maddow, Rachel. Drift: The Unmooring of American Military Power. New York: Crown, 2012.
Print.

Mead, Walter Russell. Special Providence American Foreign Policy and How It Changed the
World. New York: Routledge, 2002. Print.

Rothman, Noah. Mediaite Obama Trashes Romney For Not Understanding Military We Have
These Things Called Aircraft Carriers Comments. Mediaite, 22 Oct. 2012. Web. 7 Dec.
2013. <http://www.mediaite.com/tv/obama-trashes-romney-for-not-understandingmilitary-we-have-these-things-called-aircraft-carriers/>.
"Transcript: Obama's Speech Against The Iraq War." NPR.org. NPR, 20 Jan. 2009. Web. 9 Dec.
2013. <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99591469>.

"U.S. Constitution, Article I." LII. Legal Information Institute, n.d. Web. 10 Dec. 2013.
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei>.

18

"U.S. Constitution, Article II." LII. Legal Information Institute, n.d. Web. 10 Dec. 2013.
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleii>.

Washington, George. "Farewell Address." PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. 5 Dec. 2013.
<http://www.pbs.org/georgewashington/milestones/farewell_address_read4.html>.

19