Finally I have an opportunity to ask this question in my foreign policy class. The class will finish this week and we have evaluated almost all main US foreign policies from 1900 to 2006.
As long as what have been presented in the class, I conclude that my professor, in framing the US foreign policy, is a liberal who believe that there is certain ideal value driving the US foreign policies.
To make my conclusion justifiable, I put my questions in this way: does America really want a democratic Middle east? Is there any group of Americans that are really sincere and honest in promoting democracy? Why, instead of boycotting, US did not congratulate and just hug Hamas as a friend who had won the democratically election? What's wrong with making Hamas and Hezbollah friends?
"Well," my professor said, "I hope that this class can give you a feature that it is democracy and freedom that have been always important part of our foreign policy. The fact that sometimes we show a doubled standard, that is true, and we regret about that. But there are really people who are sincere and honest, including... Mr president..." (class were laughing...) "I mean, he may be sincere and honest though we know that his foreign policy is not like that way... And at least there were, few however, who want the US to establish a good relationship with HAMAS."
Not as he expected though, the class simply makes me sure that US foreign policy is all about expanding influence, as Mearsheimer argues, rather than exporting democracy. When the US has to chose between "a deviant democratically elected government" and "an obedient autocratic regime", the US always love the second rather than the first one.
So, if you really love democracy, like me, let us build it on our own way and don't look at the US foreign policies.(*)
Posting Komentar