Quantcast
Channel: Foreign Policy Archives - The Borgen Project
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 77

The Difference Between Urgent and Important Foreign Policy Goals

$
0
0

goals_of_foreign_policy
Though the specific goals of U.S. foreign policy have varied with different administrations, the United States’ experience with isolationism in the twentieth century has ushered in a new and more active form of foreign policy. The U.S. Department of State declares that the focus of foreign policy is the promotion of human rights, based upon the content of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. To advance the well-being of foreign nations, the Department of State website states that U.S. foreign policy seeks to secure peace, strengthen democracies, fight crime and corruption and “prevent humanitarian crises,” among other goals.

The existence of human rights on a global scale is not only in the best interest of foreign nations but of the United States as well. Successful U.S. foreign policy in defense of human rights often results in the decline of national security threats and the maintenance of the balance of power among nations. U.S. involvement in global affairs also works toward cooperative foreign trade and global economic interaction.

Creating specific U.S. foreign policy is often a balance of interests in which diplomats and leaders must decide which issues require direct and immediate attention at a given moment. Henry Kissinger, National Security Adviser and Secretary of State under Presidents Nixon and Ford, stated that when creating foreign policy it is necessary “to separate the urgent from the important and make sure you’re dealing with the important and don’t let the urgent drive out the important.”

One only needs to read the latest newspaper headlines to find that the U.S. government has recently focused heavily on the urgent threats of Iranian nuclear capabilities and Russian force against Ukraine. Although the most urgent foreign affairs have assumed much diplomatic attention, the Obama Administration has recently chosen to shift some of its focus to U.S. relations with Cuba. Affairs in Cuba are at the moment a less urgent national security issue but an important human rights issue.

Goals of foreign policy with Cuba, as listed on the state department’s website, aim at re-establishing diplomatic relations, empowering the Cuban people by “adjusting” regulations and facilitating more travel to Cuba for U.S. businesses. The potential for future health collaboration may also provide greater opportunities to advance the well being of Cubans.

The Department of State hopes that the increased flow of information and goods – up to $400 in Cuban goods, $100 of which can comprise alcohol and tobacco products – will expose the Cubans to democratic society. However, Cuban President Raul Castro still hopes to partake in dialogue with the U.S. that “acknowledges our profound differences, particularly on issues related to national sovereignty, democracy, human rights and foreign policy.” Castro plans to maintain a “prosperous and sustainable Socialism,” which could prove a point of contention between the Cuban government and American businesses that settle in the Latin American country.

No policy change in regard to the 1962 embargo with Cuba will occur until Congress officially changes the law, but international progress and cooperation between the U.S. and its offshore neighbor have already returned Cuban and American hostages to their home countries and advanced one of the most important goals of foreign policy, human rights.

– Paulina Menichiello

Sources: The White House, The Guardian, USHistory.org Pew Research Center, The Washington Post 1, The Washington Post 2, CNN, NewsWeek
Photo: The Washington Post

facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

The post The Difference Between Urgent and Important Foreign Policy Goals appeared first on The Borgen Project.


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 77

Trending Articles