How Did US Foreign Policy During The Cold War Become Detached From Ideas And Values?

3. Did US foreign policy during the Cold War become detached from ideas and values? Explain and, as appropriate, assess the consequences of foreign policy’s detachment from ideological moorings.

The President of the United States “is the steward of the people.” (LaFeber, 190) Serving of, by, and for the people, does not just mean the President is the leader, Americans look to for guidance, overtime he has been the leader to make tough decisions on maintain this nation. Sovereignty is a delicate entity, depended on security, which any sovereign space unable to protect itself, disappears. Swallowed up and forgotten, culture dies. The United States is a culture of freedom and democracy, and the President must act to defend the culture of the
“It must be the policy of the United States to Support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or outside pressures.” (Gaddis, 22) Truman is stating that following World War II, America is no longer Isolationist, and their foreign policy is not neutrality, but strict defense of democracy from all threats. Truman is committing the role of the president to be a protector of the people in addition to being a steward, and while his rhetoric opens his proclamation to a global doctrine, its fundamental purpose it to protect American culture and values from communism. While Truman wasn’t necessarily the first Cold War president to detach from his moral ideas and values, he started the trend of the President promoting what is necessary to be done in foreign relations. “Which is better for the country, to spend twenty or thirty billion dollars [over the next four years] to keep the peace or to do as we did in 1920 and then have to spend 100 billion dollars for four years to fight a war?” (Gaddis, 61) While the Nation felt it wrong to spend money following WWII to stop Soviet expansion intro Greece and Turkey, as they couldn’t see the distant threat it would pose to the US. Truman had the foresight to promote a decision that regardless of popular belief
Reagan was willing to make the tough calls to get his mission accomplished, and to protect the United States from the growing sphere of Soviet influence. Carter had allowed communism to get a hold of Nicaragua, and for the leftist Iranians to hold Americans hostage. America was coming under attack from communism and it was necessary that the US respond in ways that end the conflicts rather than appease the, Reagan was not willing to negotiate in righteous ways. He sought to accomplish American security at any cost. He wanted his hostages back so he negotiated a deal to trade arms for cash, while simultaneously got him cash to fund the pro-US contras as they attempted to take on the communist Sandinistas. Reagan was constantly acting to do what was right for national security. He made the sacrifices needed to protect the western hemisphere, not his own personal ideas and values. Similarly in Afghanistan Reagan used the CIA to fund the Mujahedeen to stop communism, his action may not have been right in the eyes of the public but he put an importance protecting the US form the Soviets growing sphere, and cared more that the Americans criticizing him were kept safe and free, rather than appease the critics and act justly and fairly. Foreign politics are dirty, because they come down to a matter of life and death. The sovereign power that lasts is the power