America: Transition to Global Superpower - Research Paper Example

Running head: AMERICA: TRANSITION TO GLOBAL SUPERPOWER America: Transition to Global Superpower and number) s name) (Date submitted) America: Transition to Global Superpower Introduction America has come a long way from the days when it was just a colony of the Great Britain. Now it holds the distinction of being one, if not the most powerful country in the world, in almost all aspects of nationhood – from the political, military, to the economic. This current position as a superpower has however been reached after many challenges and difficulties have been encountered by this country. In a major way, the wars America has engaged in and its political ideologies has resulted in its transition from an isolationist foreign policy in to one in which the nation is now a global superpower. II. Body America after the Second World War America has been involved in many wars throughout the years and these wars have molded it into the superpower it is today. America has fought many wars throughout the years, before and since it became an independent country. But no war had as much impact on its path towards superpower status than the Second World War. As the Second World War ended and Europe lay in ruins, the economic and political capability of most European nations was weakened; some of these nations had to divert all their available resources towards recovery and rehabilitation. The United States did not have such a problem, as it did not suffer economic and military set-backs during the war as much as its European counterparts (Duiker and Spielvogel, 2010). Instead, it became embroiled in a nuclear arms race with Russia after the Second World War. Both countries were suspicious of each other in the wake of the WWII where the US was suspicious of USSR’s socialist expansion plans, and the USSR was suspicious of US expansion plans and neo-colonial policies (Chatterjee, 2001). In order to support its desire to contain communist USSR, the US established coalitions with other countries in Europe, through the National Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO); and it also established ties in Asia through economic and military assistance to Asian countries threatened by communist USSR, China, North Korea, and North Vietnam (Chatterjee, 2001). As a result, the US was able to gather as much support as possible from many countries around the globe – countries that were willing to offer military and political support for the US. These countries were part of the US bloc of nations willing to support the US in its ‘war’ against USSR and communism. Since USSR also suffered much damage during the Second World War, it was already a ‘wounded’ country going into the Cold War with the US. The US, on the other hand, was experiencing an age of rapid industrial and economic progress (Ikenberry, 2005). Its growth in manufacturing expanded to accommodate about a third of the world’s manufacturers; its coal output rivaled that of Britain and Germany; and its steel production far exceeded Europe’s production (Kimball, 1992). By the beginning of the 1950s and towards the 1960s, the US already surpassed its rival Britain in terms of economic and industrial progress. Moreover, with the threat of communist USSR and its nuclear and military arms expansion, the US was not about to be outdone in that regard as it went on to amass its own nuclear and military resources (Kimball, 1992). Furthermore, the US had a vast territory and vast resources to use, and these resources served the country well, especially in its expansion activities. It also had the geographical security, as well as a significant population to man its development and expansion activities. As such, in the wake of the devastation in Europe, the US gradually rose to superpower status, in both the military and the economic plain (Feng Yaoping, 2006). In effect, The US became a country whose economic and political influence significantly rivaled that of USSR, the other superpower which relatively matched its political and military power. US involvement in wars The US’s involvement in the Vietnam, Korean, and Iraq-Kuwaiti war, as well as various global unrests has served to establish the US as a major player in international politics. Its involvement in so many wars has installed the US as a member of the United States Security Council, and this has ensured its continued contribution to military actions against countries violating the principles and mandates of the United Nations and its charter (Hardwick, 2011). Although the United Nations is a representation of a group of nations, its Security Council comprises the bulk of nations with the most influence on international politics. The Security Council is composed of ten permanent members, namely, China, France, Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States (United Nations, 2011). In matters which concern decision-making activities in terms of military attacks, the US is one of the countries which make the crucial decisions on these attacks. The peace and security of most countries around the globe are within its control and influence. When its democratic allies were threatened or attacked by communist factions, it was there to render its assistance and influence. As a result, it participated in the Korean War, the Vietnam War, as well as in the liberation of Kuwait from Iraq (Boyer and Dubofski, 2001). Its participation in these wars also served to display its military power in terms of arms and human resources. Its military resources exhibited the latest in land-based to air-based military technology. Its military arms also exemplified the latest in guns, ammunition, tanks, and similar other equipment. Their military personnel and soldiers were also adequately trained in the latest techniques and skills in warfare (Gonzales, 2007). As such, it was a formidable threat for any country in whatever war it decided to participate in. Its ability to influence the decisions of the Security Council on the launching of military attacks against threats to peace and security has been very much significant throughout the years. For example, its attack on Afghanistan and Iraq were not adequately sanctioned by the UN Security Council because of its failure to comply with the Articles 2(1) and 51 of the UN Charter (Byers, 2002). These articles basically serve as the foundation for the launch of military attacks against aggressor states. However, US political influence over other states and other members of the Security Council has managed to overshadow these provisions. As a result, the Iraq and Afghanistan attacks were launched with hardly any legal mutterings heard from other countries and other legal personalities (Berdal, 2003). The occasional questions and issues were raised by legal scholars and countries, querying on the legality of the US (and its allies) military attacks, but no formal complaint was ever brought before the Security Council or before the International Court of Justice (Berdal, 2003). This is a strong indication of the influence and political power which the US has gained over the years, a power which has managed to draw it out of its former isolationist policies. There is no doubting the military prowess it has gained and secured since the Second World War. The extent of its military hold and power has also been secured through the movement and placement of military forces in strategic parts of the world. In its horizontal axes, the US has established a premium on Europe, East Asia, and the Middle East (Klare, 2002). Its defense set-up has made it ready to face any possible military conflicts with Russia, Iraq, or Korea. It has also expanded its power on the vertical axis, in order to meet the possibility of terrorist outbreaks and insurgencies in these areas. As such, it has increased the strength of its Special Operations Forces by providing them with a diverse range of new equipment (Klare, 2002). Other initiatives include the acquisition of four AC-130u flying gun platforms; and the conversion of four Trident ballistic-missile submarines into strike submarines which are capable of carrying Tomahawk-attack cruise missiles and of installing small squads of Special Forces soldiers in hostile areas. Even as the Cold War has ended, allocations for nuclear weapons have also always been made available (Klark, 2002). Although the number of these nuclear warheads has been reduced significantly after the disintegration of the USSR, its nuclear military responsiveness has not been diminished by the Congress or the US government in general (Klark, 2002). The US has also launched a persistent enhancement of its power, even to distant battlefields; and military measures have included the implementation of mobility systems which function to deliver the US troops readily to battle zones (Klark, 2002). Its power projection capability has also been enhanced through the infusion of $4 billion for the acquisition of C-17 intercontinental cargo planes. Transport ships have also been constructed to bolster their anti-access-denial capability (Klark, 2002). The US has also sought to increase its power along the temporal axis through the establishment of weapons which would likely be used for many years against unidentified future enemies. The US, in the process, has sought to defend itself against its unknown enemies, to prepare its military forces, and to deter and defeat enemies which have not yet challenged its power. In effect, the influence of the US through its involvement in various wars, through the development of its military capability, and through the support of the UN indicates a major transition for this country from a minor to a major player in international politics. Democratic ideals of the United States Finally, in the current age where most states are operating under democratic principles, America has established its influence as the most ideal democratic country in the world. The American culture, one which seems to echo in almost all corners of the world establishes that America is the land of the free and the American ideal is one which is supported by the freedom and liberty of the people (Tocqueville and Reece, 2003). This culture has been idealized by other countries – both the democratic and non-democratic nations. As such, the contribution of the US on international and democratic ideals has been highly regarded by other countries. The ideals of the US include favorable views on human nature, society, and politics with distinct idealizations of democracy, freedom, equality, and capitalism (Ryn, 2001). Americans perceive their country as a country which is built on strong and universal principles; and they consider their country as a country which has a significant role in remaking the world. They are a people who demand moral clarity, as well as virtue and fairness (Ryn, 2001). Americans believe that human ‘perfectability’ is achievable and that securing such perfection is a function of their country. As the Soviet Union crumbled in the 1980s, the people seemed to expect that the US would be able to dominate the world based on its democratic ideals. Its zeal in this regard and towards this purpose was seen in the media and in public policy debates (Ryn, 2001). Observers noted how the frame of mind of the US was towards American dominance and value superiority. American culture spread to the rest of the world with the global sales of American shows, movies, music, newspapers, and TV news (Ryn, 2001). American culture, in other words, was exported to the rest of the world through these media. The image of America behind these shows and media was that America was a strongly democratic country, with its people enjoying freedom and various liberties unheard and unseen in any part of the world. To other countries and to other citizens of the world, America was seen as an ultimate goal – as the so-called land of milk and honey. The media also took full advantage of this ideal image of America. Columnist Krauthammer expressed that “where our cause is just and interests are threatened, we should act – even if…we must act unilaterally” (in Ryn, 2001). This belief was used in various instances, and in various battles and confrontations with negative elements. America’s political leaders saw America’s purpose as one which would serve the rights of all people, not just the rights of America, but of humanity in general. The belief that the US has a responsibility of ridding the world of negative elements and of undemocratic political principles has served as the ultimate basis for US foreign policy. During the Cold War, political players considered war as a challenge in the protection of freedom and democracy. Since the USSR basically disintegrated during the 1980s, little argument was seen in America’s military expansion and its participation in various political international affairs. In fact, many political players believed that the US should continue playing a significant role in world affairs (Ryn, 2001). Moreover, as the last remaining superpower, there was a pressure on the US to attempt to forward its democratic and human rights causes. This belief gained much popularity in the global community; moreover, American ideology also survived the issues of universalist ideology (Ryn, 2001). It also succeeded in a contest which supported the applicability of the American ideology. President George Bush was ideal in his beliefs about the US and the role of the country in the global culture. Most of his expressed ideals were based on enlightenment ideals which must be universally accepted. A united community has also been idealized by the US in relation to its goals of achieving the most ideal political situation for all nations; and once again, the US believed that only through a democratic process can this unity be achieved (Ryn, 2001). The ability of the US to peacefully carry out its affairs without conflict despite its multicultural population is a strong basis for its principles and beliefs. The US has achieved much progress towards assisting nations in gaining their freedom and in protecting their sovereignty as independent states. As a result, its democratic ideologies have been impacting on the political processes of other countries. In effect, America does not need to occupy these countries in order to influence them because these countries already base their ideals on America’s democratic ideologies. III. Conclusion In a major way, the wars that America has engaged in and its political ideologies has resulted in its transition from an isolationist foreign policy in to one in which the nation is now a global superpower. The wars have exhibited its military and political powers; and its ideologies have solidified its influence on most democratic nations in the world. First and foremost, the devastation which the Second World War brought to Europe gave the US a chance to emerge as an economic and military superpower. Before WWII, its closest economic rival was Britain and USSR, but Europe was laid to waste by the war and the US was given the chance to dominate economically and militarily. Its nuclear arms race with USSR also cemented its position as a military power. Its participation in the UN Security Council also ensured its political power in international affairs. Its subsequent participation in all global conflicts – both major and minor ensured its visibility in almost all political concerns. And finally, its democratic ideals ensured that it would have a significant impact on other countries in terms of their perceptions of liberty, democracy, and freedom. The world looked up to the US as their ideal nation, one which protected their right to liberty and their quest for democracy. All these points seek to establish that in a significant way, the wars which the US has participated in, as well as its political ideologies have helped support its transition from isolationist policies to one where the nation is now considered a global superpower. Reference Berdal, M. (2003). The UN Security Council: Ineffective but indispensable. Survival, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 7-30 Boyer, P. & Dubofsky, M. (2001). The Oxford companion to United States history. New York: Oxford University Press. Byers, M (2002). Terrorism, the Use of Force and International Law after 11 September. International Relations, vol. 16, no. 2: pp. 155–170 Chatterjee, A. (2001). International relations today. India: Pearson Education. Duiker, W. & Spielvogel, J. (2010). The Essential World History, Volume 2: Since 1500. California: Cengage Learning. Feng Yongping (2006). The Peaceful Transition of Power from the UK to the US. Chinese Journal of International Politics, 1 (1): pp. 83-108. Gonzalez, L. (2007). The U.S. Military: Defending the Nation. New York: The Rosen Publishing Group. Hardwick, N. (2011). The UN during the Cold War: “A tool of superpower influence stymied by superpower conflict”? International Relations. Retrieved 18 November 2011 from http://www.e-ir.info/?p=9370 Ikenberry, J. (2005). Power and liberal order: America’s postwar world order in transition. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific. 5, pp. 133–152 Klare, M. (2002). Endless military superiority. Retrieved 18 November 2011 from http://www.larivistadelmanifesto.it/originale/31A20020912.html Kimball, W. (1992). America unbound: World War II and the making of a superpower. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Ryn, C. (2001). The Ideology of American Empire. Foreign Policy Research Institute. Retrieved 18 November 2011 from http://www.fpri.org/orbis/4703/ryn.ideologyamericanempire.pdf Tocqueville, A. & Reeve, H. (2003). Democracy in America. New York: The LawbookExchange, Ltd. United Nations (2011). UN Security Council. Retrieved 18 November 2011 from http://www.un.org/sc/members.asp Read More