Ongoing struggle between ...
Page 1
Over the past 79 years, the answers to these questions have been shaped by the ongoing struggle between the two ideologies of interventionism and isolationism in US foreign policy. During World War II, interventionism, influenced by several key factors, ultimately triumphed.
First, the British government, struggling to prepare for war, needed US military support, especially to supply arms after the fall of Paris. Second, American Jews, given the atrocities committed by Hitler and the Nazis against their people, pushed for US involvement in the war. Third, President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s personal ambitions played a significant role. At the time, there was no legal prohibition on serving more than two terms as president, and Roosevelt was determined to prove he was the only one capable of confronting Germany. His third and fourth terms coincided with the global conflict. Alongside these catalysts, the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor significantly weakened isolationist sentiment, leading to the US involvement in the war. After World War II, US interventionism, or internationalism, became more pronounced with the establishment of organizations like NATO, the United Nations, and global financial institutions.
Interventionism continued to rise in US foreign policy, reaching its peak in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, which led to two decades of endless wars. Eventually, both US foreign policy and public opinion reached a common conclusion: interventionist policies are costly and often yield limited results, with taxpayers bearing the financial burden.
The decline of interventionism and the rise of isolationism can be traced to the 2016 election and the emergence of Donald Trump. Now, with his return to the White House, a new version of isolationism, known as the 2024 “America First” policy, will likely take center stage once again. As noted, the principle of “America First” has deep historical roots, and US political developments suggest that both interventionists and isolationists have a common red line: an attack on American soil, like Pearl Harbor or 9/11. In the current circumstances, where isolationism dominates US foreign policy, this variable is the only factor that could push isolationist policies to the periphery.