The History of International Politics in the United States Essay Example

After declaring independence from Britain in 1776, the newly minted United States found themselves entangled in a conflict with what was at the time the strongest nation in the world, possessing both political and military might. In winning the war, the United States was able to gain a crucial advantage through the assistance of France, in the end achieving independence and ending the American Revolution. Despite this, the United States remained relatively weak, struggling under the Articles of Confederation until the eventual creation of the Constitution in 1787. Despite this, the United States, led by President George Washington, committed to avoiding international conflict and unnecessary involvement, attempting to stay within the confines of North America. Although the U.S. attempted to stick to its previously preached ideals of staying out of international conflict and interactions, it continued to import and, to a lesser extent, export goods to and from other countries, and was able to utilize previously formed relationships to gain land and power, ultimately falling back on its promise to stay out of foreign affairs with the War of 1812, allowing it to serve as a warning for future generations and thereby returning to its previous status.

Despite George Washington’s warnings against it, the newly-formed United States proceeded to go on numerous forays into international interaction, remaining relatively neutral but trading goods and establishing bonds with other countries. Throughout his time as President, Washington set numerous guidelines on the need to refrain from international interaction, particularly in conflict, and unnecessary bias. In 1793, Washington made clear with the Neutrality Proclamation that he would not interfere in any kind of European conflict, with the U.S. holding a position of neutrality (Document 1). Although Washington did not oppose or prevent international trade, he continued to advocate against forming particular alliances, due to an amount of bias being created from them. Even at his resignation, in his Farewell Address, he warned against becoming too entangled with other countries, instead prompting the U.S. to focus on internal matters. These considerations seemed most clearly to be motivated by worry— as the United States, as Washington pointed out, was such a new nation, it was weak and susceptible to foreign influence and attack. Although this decision was sound, the United States still continued to become involved with international affairs, seemingly for the better. In the early 1800s, foreign trade increased steadily, particularly in goods imported from outside North America (Document 5). This likely led to a level of economic growth and prosperity, with the U.S. becoming a part of a win-win relationship with other nations, allowing it to send and receive goods. Despite its external growth, the U.S. continued to focus on internal improvement as well, making agreements with Native American tribes in order to solve land disputes, seemingly finding some level of peace (Document 2). In terms of international trade, Jefferson’s later Louisiana Purchase demonstrated a great gain being made through foreign relations— by bartering with France, the U.S. expanded greatly, growing in size and power. These particular gains led the United States into an attitude of greater openness to foreign relations, viewing them as mostly positive and becoming more active. However, this opinion was not to last.

Despite the previous positive effects of international relations, the United States came to experience the downsides warned of by Washington, getting involved in external conflicts and war that it wasn’t yet ready to face. With the growing level of confidence in the United States’ status, political leaders began to become more involved, with, in 1800, the U.S. threatening to intervene in European and Mediterranean conflict, stationing battleships to serve as a supposed warning (Document 4). This represented an explicit turn against the principles preached by Washington, showing how attitude had already began to shift. In the following years, the U.S. became more and more involved in foreign affairs, eventually resulting in the War of 1812— a military conflict between the United States and England due to the U.S.’s restrictions of trade after England’s actions went against a previously made treaty. Although technically ending in a stalemate, the War of 1812 greatly damaged the U.S., with the burning of the White House only representing one more minor aspect of the damage. This led to connections back to Washington’s previous warning, with the Secretary of the Treasury noting that the United States had now became a part of “the “evils of European conflict” (Document 6). With this, the U.S.’s position shifted, and it returned to Washington’s philosophy of staying out of conflict unrelated to it. John Quincy Adams exemplified this with an 1821 address similar to Washington’s previous ones, declaring that the United States shouldn’t search for conflict abroad, but deal with its own wellbeing first (Document 7). Although going through a massive amount of change in such a short time, the United States ended up returning to the same way it was before, not negating, but reversing, the leaps made in foreign relations, returning back into its metaphorical shell.

Looking back, it seems hard to view the United States as anything but a foreign power, finding involvement in seemingly all external conflicts, even ones that have nothing to do with it, such as the war between Russia and Ukraine. However, it was once able to retain a status of nearly complete neutrality, following Washington’s guideline of isolationism and receding back to its old ways after facing the consequences of involvement. This leads us to wonder— how, in such a relatively short amount of time, did we change so much? We could blame it on technical improvements, allowing for greater mobility and interaction. We could blame it on conflicts continually dragging us in, not due to any faults of our own. We could simply blame it on change and development— after all, the U.S. is no longer a new nation. Despite this, we have yet to solve many of our own problems, instead focusing on the issues of others. In doing so, we only hurt ourselves, rejecting our inequalities in an attempt to feel better. However, this is far from a solution. To truly become a great nation, we have to look our mistakes in the eye and actually work towards solving them rather than attempting to ease our conscience by playing the role of a heroic interloper.