Is American foreign policy a partisan issue?

Respond the below should contain at least 8-10 sentences, with one reference to the course readings and one scriptural citation, both preferably excerpts.

The question that Alana answered was Is American foreign policy a partisan issue?   Please address her below response.

The Empowered Nation -Alana

Traditionally foreign policy was a strategic game played by diplomats. Ambassadors and tradesmen would negotiate and set the terms of engagement from an economic, defensive or ideological perspective. With each nation interacting to their best advantage, the political drive was understood by all. It was not necessarily a “fair “system as a nation would have trouble “buying in” in if it had little or nothing to offer. Only the powerful really ran the political foreign policy agenda, those offering commodities that others could not live without, and those who had a “persuasive” force that could not be ignored. This was the state of foreign policy prior to the twentieth century, then with the advent of World Wars I & II, the rise of dictators such as Hitler and Stalin. Paired equally with the spread and ease of communication and the mass civil right movements, the game changed foreign policy and no longer a decision between the world’s dominant.  In the twenty-first century, especially in the individually empowered nations, foreign policy became a political agenda expressed by the partisan.

To support this claim, one might look at the foreign policy decisions that America has made over the last sixty years. The five stages in American foreign policy have developed from gaining independence[1]– “to setting things right”[2]. The final and current stage of American international policy really began in the 60’s[3] with the Vietnam war. Prior to the World Wars, America took a very hands-off approach to global matters and its foreign policy was centered on innovation with industry in mind. After the World Wars had come to a conclusion, American re-focused its foreign policy to better improve the global situation and protect the new international balance of power. American foreign policy remained in the offices of the executive offices until the Vietnam War[4], a televised war and one of the least popular in history of the United States. The age of information has challenged the citizen to a new level of international awareness[5], this was the turning point for foreign policy as the partisan began to drive international issues rather than just the executive. Political figures began crafting their foreign policy to the ideals of the supporting party rather than just what was best for the nation.

Foreign policy is very different from stating whether one supports or opposes abortions, and committing to an action that has a clear outcome of success or failure. International foreign policy is “complicated” to say the least. Political figures (and the public) like to commit to ultimatums, believing that the outcome is either good or bad. This can be counterintuitive, especially as the world is constantly changing and ultimatums are constantly needing to be “redefined.” To commit to an ultimatum like “ending the war on terror”, may be inspiring to portions of the public but it is also binding. America has committed itself to many ultimatums, like stopping communism spread, declaring a war on terror and then ending a war on terror, these were successive global concerns that American presidents built entire foreign policy doctrines upon[6]. In the end, the greatest challenge that has been presented regarding the foreign policy is the addition of the partisan opinion, it objections to change and demands resulting when it might be better to diplomatically withdraw or change tactics. “History starts today”[7] and the partisan vote, has been empowered to and is shaping America’s foreign policy, for better or worse, both Nixon and Bush, putting troops on the ground because of political opinion and by some they were latter considered foolish for doing so[8]. So much of foreign policy has been both equipped and damaged by political opinion, the decisions that are made today will be examined and reexamined, often being found faulty and then discarded in the future.