Sample Answer
A Critical Assessment of Foreign Policy under George W. Bush and Barack Obama
Introduction
The end of the Cold War established the United States as the world’s sole superpower, ushering in a new era of American foreign policy. Successive administrations sought to redefine the U.S.’s global role through various strategies, ranging from interventionism to diplomacy. The foreign policies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama, though stemming from different ideological positions, reflect both continuity and divergence in the United States’ approach to international relations, security, and diplomacy. This essay critically assesses the similarities and differences in their foreign policies, focusing on military intervention, use of diplomacy, multilateralism vs. unilateralism, and counterterrorism strategies.
Military Intervention and Use of Force
George W. Bush’s foreign policy was strongly shaped by the events of 9/11, leading to an aggressive military doctrine often termed the "Bush Doctrine," which emphasised pre-emptive strikes and unilateral military action. His administration led two major wars: the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and the controversial Iraq War in 2003, justified largely by the threat of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and the aim to promote democracy in the Middle East.
In contrast, Barack Obama campaigned on a platform critical of the Iraq War and sought to limit large-scale U.S. military interventions. While he ended U.S. combat operations in Iraq in 2011 and reduced troop levels in Afghanistan, his administration also engaged in military action, notably the NATO-led intervention in Libya in 2011. Unlike Bush, Obama preferred limited military engagements, often utilising drone strikes and special operations forces to target terrorist threats, particularly in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. Thus, while Obama scaled back ground troop involvement, he did not abandon military action, showing continuity in using force, though with different methods and scope.
Multilateralism vs. Unilateralism
A major distinction lies in their approach to international cooperation. Bush often bypassed international institutions, as seen in the Iraq War, where he acted with a "coalition of the willing" despite opposition from the United Nations. His administration’s unilateral tendencies strained relations with key allies, especially in Europe.
Obama, by contrast, emphasised multilateralism and sought to rebuild diplomatic ties. He supported working through international institutions, such as the United Nations and NATO, and pursued arms control agreements like the New START treaty with Russia in 2010. His commitment to multilateralism was evident in the Iran Nuclear Deal (2015), a multilateral agreement aimed at curbing Iran’s nuclear programme, contrasting sharply with Bush’s more confrontational stance toward Iran.
Counterterrorism Strategies
Both presidents made counterterrorism a central focus. Bush established the Department of Homeland Security, implemented the USA PATRIOT Act, and authorised controversial interrogation and surveillance programmes. His policy was marked by a global “War on Terror,” encompassing military campaigns and aggressive security measures.
Obama continued many of these counterterrorism efforts but shifted tactics. While criticising Bush-era torture methods and ordering the closure of Guantanamo Bay (a goal ultimately unfulfilled), he expanded the use of drone strikes and authorised the operation that killed Osama bin Laden in 2011. Thus, while Obama’s rhetoric emphasised human rights and legality, in practice, he maintained and even intensified aspects of the counterterrorism apparatus.
