This research focuses on the United States’ foreign policy in the Third World (meaning here not industrialized, mainly poor countries) and its use of words (internetional law and diplomacy) and deeds (coercive diplomacy and military intervention). The numerous historical examples reveal the treacherous nature of American Foreign Policy, because the USA prefers the law of force rather than the force of law for the sake of its own interests.
The examples of the invasion of Grenada, Libya, and Nicaragua support the argument that the USA is ready to use force and go against international law to pursue its own national interest. Contrary to its claims of being the fighter for democracy and human rights in the world, America does protect it only when it is convenient to it and when it can somehow benefit from spending money on the liberation operations. However, it is vital to keep in mind that being a rational player the USA invaded only militarily weak countries.
Table of Contents
Introduction.
The Force of Law.
The Law of Force.
Conclusion.
Research Objective and Core Themes
This paper examines the foreign policy of the United States toward Third World countries, critically analyzing the tension between the country's rhetorical commitment to international law and diplomacy versus its actual reliance on coercive measures and covert military interventions to secure national interests.
- The discrepancy between international legal principles (UN Charter) and US foreign policy practice.
- The role and effectiveness of coercive diplomacy in international relations.
- The impact and strategic goals of CIA covert operations in sovereign states.
- The geopolitical prioritization of US national interests over democratic promotion.
Excerpt from the Book
The Force of Law.
The force of law presupposes the compliance with the international obligations, i.e. international law. The main source of basics of the international law was and might still be the Charter of the United Nations. Article 2(4) requires all members of the UN to “refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nation.” This article was violated numerous times by many countries and the practice shows that it is needed by the militarily weak nations to condemn the use of force by the stronger countries. Obviously, this article doesn’t reflect the de facto nature of this globe and interrelations of the countries.
The USA is the strongest country in the world and it has used force many times against the weaker countries giving all sorts of justifications for its actions. One of the applicable examples in this case would be the invasion of Grenada in 1983. It was “variously justified –as necessary to save lives of US nationals, as responding to an invitation by the governor-general; as urged be Grenada’s small neighbors; as required to restore to the people the right of self-determination and democracy.” However, “ an alleged threat against American medical students studying there – was never verified; neither the CIA nor any of America’s other intelligence agencies had espionage agents on the island.” Grenada was also attacked without informing Britain – the head of the Commonwealth. The US was actively intervening in Central America at the time, and made Grenada an “example”.
Chapter Summaries
Introduction: Provides the historical context of global conflicts and outlines the research objective, which is to investigate the discrepancy between the United States' stated commitment to international law and its frequent use of force.
The Force of Law: Discusses the theoretical framework of international law under the UN Charter and contrasts it with historical cases where the US bypassed these legal structures, such as in Grenada or Nicaragua.
The Law of Force: Analyzes the instruments of US foreign policy, specifically focusing on coercive diplomacy and CIA covert operations as tools to maintain influence and achieve national objectives in the Third World.
Conclusion: Summarizes the findings that US foreign policy consistently prioritizes national interests over international legal compliance, often utilizing democratic rhetoric to mask geopolitical and economic motivations.
Keywords
American Foreign Policy, Third World, International Law, UN Charter, Coercive Diplomacy, Military Intervention, CIA, Covert Operations, National Interest, Cold War, Democracy, Sovereignty, Hegemony, Geopolitics, Interventionism.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central focus of this research paper?
The paper focuses on the dichotomy between American rhetoric regarding international law and the practical implementation of its foreign policy in developing nations.
What are the primary thematic areas covered?
The study covers international legal frameworks, the history of US military interventions, the definition of coercive diplomacy, and the impact of clandestine CIA actions.
What is the primary objective of this work?
The goal is to analyze whether the United States acts as a genuine promoter of democracy or if it uses the guise of law and democracy to enforce its own interests.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The research uses a qualitative historical analysis, examining case studies of US foreign policy decisions and official justifications against the backdrop of international legal norms.
What is analyzed in the main body of the text?
The main body investigates the failure of coercive diplomacy, the justification of military acts through the lens of national security, and the strategic rationale behind historical CIA interventions.
Which keywords best describe this work?
Key terms include American Foreign Policy, Coercive Diplomacy, CIA, International Law, National Interest, and Third World countries.
How does the author characterize the US role in international law?
The author argues that the US often assumes the appearance of a law-abiding player when it serves its interests, but frequently ignores these same laws when they become a barrier to its objectives.
What is the author's stance on CIA covert operations?
The author views these operations as a systematic violation of international law and sovereign independence, aimed primarily at protecting US economic and security interests rather than spreading democracy.
- Quote paper
- Irina Wolf (Author), 2005, American Foreign Policy in the Third World Countries, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/130060
