AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY

From Neutrality To Isolationism (1776-1830)

From 1776 to 1830, U.S. foreign policy was characterized by a strong desire to maintain neutrality
and avoid entanglement in European conflicts, driven by its geographic isolation and nascent national
identity. Early on, the U.S. aimed to stay out of the ongoing rivalries between European powers,
particularly Britain and France, to protect its fragile independence. Washington’s Farewell Address in
1796 was a cornerstone of this policy, urging the country to avoid political and military alliances
while focusing on commercial relationships. His advice became even more significant after the War
of 1812, a costly conflict that reaffirmed the nation’s commitment to neutrality and independence. At
the same time, the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 were enacted in response to fears of internal
subversion, particularly from French immigrants during a period of tension with France. These laws
were designed to protect the nation from perceived foreign threats, highlighting early national
insecurity.

The Monroe Doctrine (1823) marked a significant shift in U.S. foreign policy, moving the country
from cautious neutrality toward a more assertive and isolationist stance. It was primarily a response to
the wave of Latin American independence movements and concerns that European powers might
attempt to reassert control in the Western Hemisphere. The Doctrine proclaimed that the Americas
were closed to further European colonization and demanded that European powers refrain from
interfering in the affairs of newly independent Latin American nations. In return, the U.S. pledged not
to interfere in European politics, setting the stage for a more distinct separation between American
and European affairs. Though ideologically framed as a defense of republican values, the Doctrine
also had strategic implications, aiming to solidify U.S. influence in the Americas.

Expansionism To Imperialism (1783-1914)

Between 1783 and 1914, U.S. foreign policy was heavily shaped by territorial expansion, often
through treaties, purchases, and armed conflict. The idea of Manifest Destiny, which became
prominent in the 1840s, embodied the belief that U.S. expansion across the continent was both
inevitable and morally justified. While much of the territorial acquisition was peaceful—such as the
Louisiana Purchase from France and the acquisition of Florida from Spain—it also involved
significant conflict, particularly with Native American nations, whose rights were often disregarded.
The Mexican-American War (1846–48), sparked by the annexation of Texas, resulted in U.S. control
over vast territories, including California and the Southwest, but also deepened domestic divisions
over the expansion of slavery.

After the Civil War, U.S. foreign policy shifted towards imperialism, driven by economic needs,
strategic considerations, and evolving ideologies like Social Darwinism and the White Man’s Burden,
which framed imperialism as a civilizing mission. With the frontier declared closed in 1890, the U.S.
sought new territories abroad. The Spanish-American War of 1898 marked a key turning point,
resulting in the U.S. gaining control over Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines, and
establishing a stronger military and economic presence in the Pacific. The U.S. also expanded its
influence in China through the Open Door Policy and military intervention in the Boxer Rebellion. In
Latin America, the Roosevelt Corollary (1904) extended the Monroe Doctrine by asserting the U.S.
right to intervene in countries experiencing internal instability, solidifying its dominance in the
region.
Isolationism To Internationalism (1914-1945)

From 1914 to 1945, U.S. foreign policy shifted between isolationism and internationalism. Initially,
the U.S. adhered to its isolationist traditions, staying out of World War I. However, growing
economic ties with the Allies and moral support for their cause led President Woodrow Wilson to
justify entry into the war in 1917, advocating for a new world order based on self-determination, free
trade, and collective security. Despite its participation in the war, the U.S. maintained its autonomy by
keeping its military command separate from that of its allies. After the war, the U.S. rejected the
Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations, favoring a limited international role.

In the 1920s, the U.S. pursued internationalism through economic diplomacy, signing separate peace
treaties and promoting trade-friendly policies like the Open Door Policy. The Kellogg-Briand Pact of
1928, which renounced war as a tool of national policy, and disarmament efforts reflected a desire for
peace, although domestic economic concerns often took precedence. The Great Depression of the
1930s led to a rise in isolationist sentiment, with many Americans feeling that involvement in World
War I had been a mistake driven by economic interests. As global tensions escalated, President
Franklin D. Roosevelt faced strong public resistance to intervention but managed to support the Allies
through the Lend-Lease Act of 1941, providing military aid without direct involvement in the war.

The attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941 marked the end of U.S. isolationism. The U.S. declared
war on Japan and its Axis allies, leading the country into World War II. President Roosevelt reframed
the war as a global struggle for democracy and peace, using the term “United Nations” to describe the
Allied powers, signaling a commitment to international cooperation. As the war progressed, Roosevelt
envisioned a post-war world order based on his “Four Freedoms”—freedom of speech, freedom of
religion, freedom from want, and freedom from fear. This vision laid the groundwork for the creation
of the United Nations in 1945, which aimed to prevent future conflicts and promote global peace,
marking a significant shift towards internationalism and cooperation in U.S. foreign policy.

The Cold War Era (1946-1992)

The Cold War began in 1946, following World War II, as the U.S. and the Soviet Union emerged as
rival superpowers. The death of President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1945 and the atomic bombings of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki dramatically reshaped global politics. In 1946, Winston Churchill’s “Iron
Curtain” speech highlighted the division of Europe into Soviet-controlled Eastern Europe and U.S.-
aligned Western Europe, signaling the start of a tense standoff. The U.S. responded with the Truman
Doctrine in 1947, which committed to containing Soviet communism globally. This policy, driven by
the belief in the “domino effect,” posited that the fall of one country to communism would trigger
others. The National Security Act of 1947 established the Department of Defense, the CIA, and the
National Security Council, cementing a permanent state of readiness for the U.S.

In 1956, the Soviet Union crushed the Hungarian Revolution, but the U.S. chose not to intervene,
adhering to the Truman Doctrine’s limitation to countries outside the Soviet-controlled Eastern bloc.
Similarly, during the Soviet suppression of the Prague Spring in 1968, the U.S. avoided direct
involvement, reinforcing the policy of strategic restraint in Eastern Europe. The 1980s, however,
marked a shift in U.S. foreign policy under President Ronald Reagan, who launched the Strategic
Defense Initiative (SDI) to create a missile defense system. Despite this militarization, Reagan
pursued diplomatic efforts, and the U.S. signed important arms reduction treaties with the Soviet
Union. The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1992 marked the
end of the Cold War, leaving the U.S. as the world’s only superpower.

Post-Cold War Era (1990s)

With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the U.S. entered the 1990s as the dominant global power. The
decade began with reluctance to engage in global conflicts unilaterally. Under Presidents George
H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, the U.S. focused on multilateral efforts, participating in peacekeeping
missions in Bosnia, attempting nation-building in Somalia (which ended in failure after U.S.
casualties), and stabilizing Haiti. Diplomatic efforts also targeted global conflicts in Northern Ireland,
North Korea, and Palestine. However, the failure to intervene in the Rwandan genocide in 1994 left a
significant mark on U.S. foreign policy. This misstep led to more decisive actions in the future, such
as U.S. intervention in Sudan in 2003. The 1990s were characterized by a balancing act between
humanitarian efforts and strategic interests, signaling a shift from the Cold War’s confrontational
approach.

The War on Terror and Unilateralism (2001-2004)

The events of September 11, 2001, when al-Qaeda terrorists attacked the U.S., dramatically shifted
U.S. foreign policy. The attacks led President George W. Bush to declare a global “War on Terror.”
Within weeks, the U.S. launched military operations in Afghanistan to dismantle the Taliban regime
and eliminate al-Qaeda. The attacks also prompted the U.S. to adopt a policy of pre-emptive action
against states deemed a threat, including Iraq. In 2003, the U.S. invaded Iraq, citing the threat of
weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and alleged links to al-Qaeda. Despite significant opposition
from the United Nations and traditional allies, the U.S. moved forward with the invasion, resulting in
the rapid collapse of Saddam Hussein’s regime. However, the failure to find WMDs and the
subsequent insurgency raised concerns about the risks of unilateral military action and led to global
debates over the justification for the war.

Election of George W. Bush (2004)

In 2004, George W. Bush was re-elected, signaling continued public support for his foreign policy
despite mounting criticism of the Iraq War. The U.S. faced growing challenges in both Iraq and
Afghanistan, with rising casualties and no clear end to the conflict. Bush’s re-election reinforced his
commitment to aggressive foreign policy, including controversial practices like the detention and
interrogation of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, which sparked debates over human rights and the
Geneva Conventions.

The Election of Barack Obama (2008)

In 2008, Barack Obama was elected president, promising to shift U.S. foreign policy away from the
unilateral approach of the Bush administration. Obama opposed the Iraq War and emphasized a return
to diplomacy and multilateralism. His victory marked a rejection of the previous administration’s
aggressive stance and a focus on “soft power”—using diplomacy, international alliances, and
economic influence to address global challenges. Obama pledged to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq,
focusing on stabilizing Afghanistan, and sought to rebuild U.S. relationships with allies. His
presidency marked a significant shift in U.S. foreign policy towards cooperation and collaboration on
the world stage, aiming to restore America’s global reputation.

The Evolution of U.S. Foreign Policy Since the Conclusion of Barack Obama’s
Presidency
Since Barack Obama’s tenure as President ended on January 20, 2017, U.S. foreign policy has
undergone profound transformations, influenced by shifting domestic political landscapes, evolving
global dynamics, and the necessity to address emerging international challenges and opportunities.
This analysis examines the foreign policy frameworks of Donald Trump during his initial term (2017–
2021) and his ongoing second term (commencing 2025), alongside Joe Biden’s administration (2021–
2025), with particular attention to the initial phase of Trump’s second term as of April 22, 2025. Over
this period, the United States has oscillated between unilateral actions prioritizing national
sovereignty, multilateral collaboration with global partners, and selective engagement in international
affairs.

Overview of U.S. Foreign Policy in the Post-Obama Era

The international environment Obama left behind in 2017 was markedly different from the one he
inherited, characterized by the ascendance of powers such as China and Russia, persistent conflicts in
regions like Ukraine and the Middle East, and the emergence of non-traditional threats including
cyberattacks and climate change. During his presidency, Obama pursued a foreign policy rooted in
multilateralism, leveraging diplomacy and soft power—defined as cultural and ideological influence
—to foster global partnerships. His administration achieved significant milestones, including the
negotiation of the Iran Nuclear Deal to constrain Iran’s nuclear program, the initiation of diplomatic
rapprochement with Cuba after decades of estrangement, and leadership in the Paris Climate
Agreement to combat global warming through collective action. These initiatives underscored a
commitment to international cooperation over unilateral action.

Following Obama’s departure, U.S. foreign policy experienced a notable shift. Donald Trump
introduced his “America First” doctrine, emphasizing national sovereignty, economic protectionism,
and a willingness to challenge established alliances. In contrast, Joe Biden sought to reinstate a
multilateral approach, reinforcing ties with traditional allies and addressing global crises
collaboratively. As of early 2025, Trump’s second term appears to revive his earlier focus on
safeguarding American interests and engaging selectively with the international community, shaped
by domestic imperatives and the unpredictable nature of global events. This oscillation reflects an
ongoing debate within the United States about its role as a global leader versus a more insular power.

The principal foreign policy domains under scrutiny include:

1. National security and counterterrorism efforts

2. Trade and economic diplomacy

3. Climate and environmental policy

4. Promotion of human rights and democratic governance

5. Arms control and nonproliferation

6. Strategic priorities in regions such as Ukraine, the Middle East, and the Indo-Pacific

Donald Trump’s First Term (2017–2021)

Donald Trump’s initial presidency was defined by his “America First” doctrine, a foreign policy
framework that prioritized U.S. sovereignty, shielded the domestic economy from global competition,
and favored targeted military interventions over extensive international commitments. This approach
represented a significant departure from Obama’s emphasis on multilateralism, resonating with
historical tendencies toward isolationism, as exemplified by George Washington’s caution against
excessive foreign entanglements. Trump reconfigured alliances, renegotiated trade agreements to
benefit American interests, and pursued unconventional diplomatic initiatives, often circumventing
established bureaucratic norms.
Key Foreign Policy Initiatives

1. Withdrawal from the Iran Nuclear Deal

Trump withdrew the United States from the Iran Nuclear Deal, a multilateral agreement designed to
limit Iran’s nuclear capabilities in exchange for sanctions relief, reinstating punitive measures to curb
Iran’s regional influence.
This decision alienated key allies in Europe and partners like China, who supported the agreement,
leading to increased tensions as Iran resumed aspects of its nuclear program. The move strained
transatlantic relations, prompting criticism from European leaders and shifting U.S. policy toward a
confrontational stance, which undermined a cornerstone of Obama’s diplomatic legacy.
The withdrawal reversed a major multilateral achievement and paralleled past instances of unilateral
action, such as the decision to invade Iraq, though it avoided direct military engagement.

2. Trade Conflict with China

Trump initiated a trade war by imposing tariffs on Chinese goods, alleging unfair trade practices that
disadvantaged U.S. industries, which prompted retaliatory tariffs and culminated in a partial trade
agreement.

The trade dispute disrupted international supply chains, elevated costs for certain goods, and signaled
a strategic reorientation to counter China’s economic ascent, reshaping U.S.-China diplomatic and
economic relations. It emphasized bilateral leverage over adherence to global trade norms.

This approach echoed earlier protectionist policies that strained global commerce, contrasting with the
open-market frameworks established by recent trade pacts.

3. Abraham Accords

Trump facilitated peace agreements normalizing relations between Israel and several Arab states,
orchestrated by his administration’s diplomatic team, marking a significant shift in Middle East
dynamics.
These accords reduced regional hostilities, enhanced U.S. strategic influence against Iran, and
diverted attention from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, though they were critiqued for avoiding
comprehensive peace negotiations. The initiative showcased Trump’s ability to achieve diplomatic
breakthroughs through nontraditional means.
The accords built upon prior Middle East diplomatic efforts but prioritized pragmatic bilateral
agreements, akin to historic peace treaties.
 4. Assassination of Qasem Soleimani

A U.S. drone strike eliminated Qasem Soleimani, Iran’s prominent military commander, triggering
Iranian missile retaliation and escalating tensions in the region.
The strike disrupted Iran’s regional military operations but risked broader conflict, eliciting mixed
international responses and underscoring Trump’s preference for decisive, unilateral military actions
over sustained campaigns.
This operation mirrored past targeted strikes against high-profile adversaries but lacked the
multilateral support seen in earlier missions.

5. Exit from the Paris Climate Agreement

Trump withdrew the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement, contending that it imposed
excessive economic burdens on American industries, redirecting focus to domestic priorities.
This decision isolated the U.S. from global climate efforts, drawing condemnation from allies and
weakening international environmental cooperation, reflecting a prioritization of national interests
over collective action.
The withdrawal diverged from Obama’s climate leadership and contrasted with the collaborative
ethos of past multinational initiatives.

Trump’s first term disrupted the post-World War II multilateral order, favoring bilateral negotiations
and economic pressure over reliance on international institutions. Initially, he appointed experienced
diplomats to guide his early foreign policy, but later shifted to loyalists who supported his more
assertive moves, such as the Iran deal exit. The Abraham Accords and trade war with China redefined
regional and global relationships, demonstrating both innovative diplomacy and economic strategy.
However, the Paris withdrawal and Soleimani strike strained alliances, prompting a reevaluation of
U.S. leadership on the world stage. Over time, public sentiment leaned toward renewed international
engagement, highlighting tensions between isolationism and global cooperation.

Joe Biden’s Administration (2021–2025)

Joe Biden’s foreign policy aimed to restore the multilateral framework of Obama’s era, with Secretary
of State Antony Blinken articulating a vision of “building back better.” This strategy emphasized
rebuilding alliances, addressing global threats such as climate change and pandemics, and countering
authoritarian regimes in China and Russia. However, domestic political divisions and international
crises constrained his ambitions, shaping a pragmatic yet challenged foreign policy approach.

Key Foreign Policy Initiatives

1. Withdrawal from Afghanistan

Biden completed the U.S. troop withdrawal from Afghanistan, adhering to a framework established
previously, amid a chaotic exit marked by a deadly attack and the Taliban’s swift resurgence.
The end of the long-standing conflict signaled a retreat from nation-building efforts, but the
disorganized withdrawal damaged U.S. credibility with allies and emboldened adversaries,
influencing perceptions of American reliability in future military endeavors.
This aligned with Obama’s gradual reduction of military presence, though it encountered significant
bureaucratic resistance, reflecting historical difficulties in exiting prolonged engagements.

2. Formation of the AUKUS Pact

Biden spearheaded the AUKUS security pact with the United Kingdom and Australia to counter
China’s influence, including provisions for advanced military technology transfers.
This alliance bolstered Indo-Pacific security and economic ties, though it strained relations with a key
ally due to a canceled defense contract, reinforcing U.S. prioritization of China containment.
It expanded upon Obama’s strategic pivot to Asia, echoing a long-standing policy of maintaining a
robust presence in the region.

3. Support for Ukraine and Sanctions on Russia

Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Biden provided substantial assistance, deployed troops to
reassure European allies, and imposed stringent economic sanctions to undermine Russia’s war
efforts.
This revitalized NATO unity and reasserted a containment strategy, but declining public support
reflected fatigue with extended international commitments, challenging the cohesion of allied efforts.
The approach mirrored Cold War containment tactics, with sanctions reminiscent of past responses to
Russian territorial ambitions.

4. Reentry into the Paris Climate Agreement

Biden rejoined the Paris Climate Agreement and advanced a comprehensive climate policy to reduce
emissions, reestablishing U.S. leadership in global environmental efforts.

This restored America’s role in international climate action, though domestic opposition limited its
scope, affecting global perceptions of U.S. commitment to collective goals.

It built upon Obama’s climate diplomacy, aligning with the collaborative traditions of past
multinational frameworks.
 5. Response to the Gaza Conflict

After a significant Hamas attack on Israel, Biden offered robust support, vetoed international ceasefire
proposals, and engaged in mediation efforts amid ongoing violence.
This reinforced the U.S.-Israel alliance but strained relations with Arab states and frustrated peace
advocates, perpetuating a cycle of diplomatic challenges in the region.
It continued decades of U.S. alignment with Israel, echoing Obama’s difficulties in achieving lasting
peace.

Biden’s administration successfully revitalized alliances and addressed global challenges, earning
recognition for strengthening international cooperation. However, domestic polarization and complex
regional dynamics, particularly in the Middle East, constrained his foreign policy impact.
Bureaucratic resistance, evident during the Afghanistan withdrawal, and opposition from political
rivals on climate and security issues shaped a pragmatic yet limited approach. His emphasis on
Ukraine and China aligned with historical containment strategies, though waning public interest posed
ongoing obstacles to sustained engagement.

Donald Trump’s Second Term (2025–Present)

As of April 22, 2025, Trump’s second term, inaugurated on January 20, 2025, has reintroduced the
“America First” doctrine, prioritizing economic protectionism, border security, and selective
international involvement. Early actions indicate a reliance on loyal advisors, such as Marco Rubio as
Secretary of State, to advance his agenda, mitigating the resistance encountered from established
figures during his first term.

Key Foreign Policy Initiatives

1. Tariff Threats Against Canada, Mexico, and China

Trump preemptively threatened tariffs on goods from Canada, Mexico, and China, citing concerns
over drug trafficking and migration as justification for a tough trade stance.
This policy risks disrupting trade relationships, potentially increasing costs and prompting economic
retaliation, though it aligns with his focus on national security and economic sovereignty.
It recalls past protectionist measures and his earlier trade disputes, diverging from cooperative trade
frameworks.

2. MS-13 Reward Program

The administration offered rewards for information leading to the apprehension of MS-13 gang
leaders, classifying them as terrorists to address transnational crime.
This targets cross-border security threats, reinforcing U.S. priorities, but may complicate diplomatic
ties with neighboring nations.
It aligns with post-crisis security enhancements, adapting them to new challenges as seen under
Obama.
 3. Proposals for Greenland and Panama

Trump proposed asserting U.S. control over Greenland and the Panama Canal, arguing these moves
would counter China’s strategic influence.
These suggestions could provoke diplomatic tensions and alienate allies, though they aim to secure
U.S. interests against rival powers.
They evoke past territorial expansions, though they lack the broad international support of earlier
efforts.

4. Shift in Ukraine Policy

Trump advocated for a negotiated settlement between Ukraine and Russia, potentially leveraging
Ukraine’s resources to reduce U.S. involvement.
This approach may undermine NATO unity, with European allies favoring continued support,
reflecting a cost-conscious foreign policy.
It mirrors past détente strategies with adversaries, contrasting with recent containment policies.

Trump’s second term, still in its early stages, promises a disruptive foreign policy through trade
restrictions and territorial ambitions, supported by a loyal team to overcome past resistance. A narrow
congressional majority and public exhaustion with political debates limit legislative success, while
rising powers like China and Russia challenge U.S. influence, testing the viability of his unilateral
approach.

Foreign Policy Themes and Continuity

1. National Security and Counterterrorism

 Continuity: Each administration prioritized counterterrorism, building on security

frameworks established after major attacks, with targeted operations and border-focused
strategies.

 Change: Trump’s emphasis on border security diverged from Biden’s multilateral

counterterrorism efforts, reflecting domestic political influences.

2. Trade and Economic Diplomacy

 Continuity: Efforts to manage China’s economic rise connected Obama’s trade initiatives,
Biden’s alliances, and Trump’s tariffs to a historical policy of economic influence.
  Change: Trump’s protectionism contrasted with Biden’s open-market approach, risking
global trade stability.

3. Climate and Environmental Policy

 Continuity: Biden’s climate reengagement built on Obama’s leadership, gaining international

support.

 Change: Trump’s withdrawal prioritized national interests over global cooperation.

4. Human Rights and Democracy Promotion

 Continuity: Biden and Obama’s advocacy for rights persisted, though it remained a
secondary concern.

 Change: Trump’s deal-driven diplomacy sidelined human rights, focusing on strategic

outcomes.

5. Arms Control and Nonproliferation

 Continuity: Preventing weapons proliferation linked Obama’s diplomacy, Biden’s sanctions,

and Trump’s deterrence to past arms negotiations.

 Change: Trump’s deal exit and Biden’s revival struggles highlighted policy divides.

6. Regional Priorities

 Middle East: U.S.-Israel alignment continued, but peace efforts stalled as under Obama.

 Indo-Pacific: Strategies countered China, building on Obama’s pivot.

 Europe/Ukraine: Biden’s alliance focus contrasted with Trump’s negotiation stance.

Foreign Policy Challenges

 Domestic Priorities: With significant attention on internal issues, foreign policy struggled to
maintain public and political support.
  Bureaucratic Resistance: Entrenched officials slowed major shifts, mirroring past
administrative challenges.

 Global Complexity: Rising powers like China and Russia challenged U.S. dominance,
necessitating adaptive strategies.

 Public Fatigue: Growing weariness with international commitments hindered sustained

engagement.

Conclusion
U.S. foreign policy since Obama’s presidency has navigated a dynamic global landscape, oscillating
between Trump’s unilateral “America First” doctrine and Biden’s multilateral restoration. Key events
—such as the Iran deal withdrawal, the Abraham Accords, the Afghanistan exit, the AUKUS pact,
Ukraine support, and new tariff threats—illustrate strategic responses to a multipolar world. These
policies draw on historical traditions, from isolationism to cooperative frameworks, but face obstacles
from domestic divisions and rival powers. As of early 2025, Trump’s second term signals continued
disruption, testing alliances and economic stability. The United States remains a pivotal global actor,
yet its future influence hinges on balancing national interests with international collaboration in an
increasingly complex world.