Dr. Buzzanco
HIST 6393
Book Review – America’s Mission by Tony Smith
Jason P. Theriot
30 August 2006
Democracy is on the rise, and has been since Thomas Jefferson drafted the
Declaration of Independence. From its humbled begins, the United States sought to
promote the establishment of democratic states throughout the international community
to protect its own national security interests. The creation of the Monroe Doctrine in 1823
saw, for the first time, the U.S. extending its democratic power to protect its neighbors
from foreign—mainly European—intervention, thus protecting it own security.
The U.S. war with Spain (1989) became, as Tony Smith, author of America’s
Mission, describes, “a watershed event in U.S. foreign policy.” For the first time, the U.S.
used it military and political power to establish control outside its borders. The event
marked a new era of U.S. participation in world affairs. Throughout the next century,
U.S. foreign policy centered on Liberal Democratic Internationalism, or what the author
deems, “Wilsonianism.”
Wilsonianism, by Smith’s definition, is the belief that America’s national interests
could best be served by promoting democracy world wide. In America’s Mission, Smith
provides an historical overview of U.S. foreign policy in the twentieth century, as it
relates to the doctrines set forth by President Woodrow Wilson (1912 – 1921). In his
narrative, Smith also seeks to answer how U.S. foreign policy contributed to the rise of
liberal democratic governments throughout the world. In this work, he identifies key U.S.
leaders who immolated Wilson’s doctrine and provides an analysis of their success and
failures at promoting democracy abroad. Throughout the work, Smith showcases
particular global events and engages historical figures in their struggles to accept or
subvert western liberal democratic reforms in their own state. The author suggests that by
continuing the tradition of promoting liberal democratic self-government throughout the
world, first by Woodrow Wilson, then by Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John F.
Kennedy, and Ronald Reagan, America has maintained its global economic and political
power, and its national security interests are far less threatened today than a century ago
due to the spread of democracy.
Woodrow Wilson, the 28th president, understood the threat to constitutional
freedoms. In order to control the territorial problems in Europe and to “make the world
safe for democracy” he believed that states should behold law and order within their
governments and societies. He felt that nations should practice self determination. He
promoted the idea of international organizations made up of free nations to develop free
trade and for mutual defense. Smith argues that Wilson’s ideals were not material driven;
Wilson worked toward defending the “principals of democracy” to better the world rather
than to better America’s economic interest. However, Smith contents that Wilson failed
to recognized that not all nations were capable of accepting liberal democratic reforms. In
some instances, such as the Philippines and the Dominican Republic, nationalist
sentiment in those poor countries emerged to fend off western ideals. As Wilson and
many of his predecessors found out, democracy is not for everybody.
Success from the Wilsonian doctrine would come years after Wilson’s failed
League of Nations and failed land reforms in third world countries. FDR’s post World
War II liberal democratic initiatives in Germany and Japan became the “high water mark
for American foreign policy success.” By establishing the Atlantic Charter and the
Brenton Woods agreement, by Roosevelt, and the United Nations and the Marshall Plan
by Truman, the two U.S. leaders brought much of Europe out from complete economic
and political destruction. However, with the rise of communism, the followers of
Wilsonianism needed to augment their tradition liberal democratic policies.
The “New Realism” foreign policy approach of Roosevelt, Truman, and
Eisenhower, differed from Wilson’s doctrine in that these leaders of American hegemony
understood the limitations of democracy. Liberal democratic internationalism did not
apply to all nations; therefore the U.S. should not pursue democracy globally. In fact,
FDR revoked old policies (Roosevelt Corollary and Platt Amendment) to declare that no
country, not even the U.S., should intervene militarily over another nation. Furthermore,
the Eisenhower and later Kennedy administrations acted favorably toward authoritarian
governments in their foreign policy with the strategy of containing communism at all
cost. This shift in policy of supporting dictators differed radically from hard-line
Wilsonians. And in Smith’s opinion, it was a “fateful” decision.
Smith argues that the U.S. foreign policy often looks for the short term solution to
international problems, such as in Iran or Vietnam. Sometimes, as Smith warns a
“reckless disregard for local circumstances based on dubious geopolitical concerns” will
inevitable end in disaster both for U.S. nation security interests and for nationals directly
affected. Again, Smith asserts, democracy is not for everybody.
With Ronald Reagan’s “peace through strength” policy came the fall of Soviet
Communism. “No administration since Woodrow Wilson,” Smith argues, “had been so
committed to the tenants of liberal democratic internationalism as that of Ronald
Reagan.” Although Smith agrees that Reagan’s policy made tremendous strides in
economic advances and free market enterprise globally, he did not tear down the iron
curtain himself. While other border-line communist states looked to Reaganomics as a
model of prosperity, the author believes that the Soviet Union’s downfall was of its own
accord.
The century of U.S. foreign policy had undergone various changes throughout
administrations, as socio-political changes swept across the globe. But the Wilsonian
doctrine continued to promoted liberal democratic practices—losing some battles along
the way, but maintain its goal: spreading democracy to protect America’s national
security. Although new threats emerged in the 1990s and at the turn of the twenty-first
century, the strength of America’s foreign policy “lies in its powerful relations with its
fellow democracies.”
As an overview, America’s Mission succeeds in providing the reader with general
understanding of U.S. foreign policy from Wilson to Reagan. In addition, the author
provides multiple analysis of the events, which at times seems too theoretical and
overreaching (to many “what ifs”), however, for the most part, the analysis helps to
further explain the consequences and fallouts of America’s Mission to spread democracy
abroad.