Jump to content

User:Uva honeybadger/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Isolationism is a foreign policy implemented by a nation in which it chooses to withdraw from all foreign affairs, acting only in the domestic political and economic sphere. Isolationism requires an unwillingness to participate in international relations as well as the ability to do so. Isolationism is a long-term rejection of formal alliances, political agreements, and economic agreements created and enforced in the international sphere. Nations that turn to isolationism are motivated by a perceived benefit as a result of their withdrawal from foreign affairs.[1] Isolationism is contested or built upon by some as the concept empirically has seen many variations, and therefore will be different across cases. [2]

Characteristics[edit]

Isolationism is not a rigid concept due to the wide variety of cases in which it has been observed. Isolationist policies institutionalised per case are not identical. Hence why isolationism is a concept that is contested or added to by some scholars. Isolationism does however, have a set of criteria to which the empirical cases of isolationism largely adhere to. As isolationism is a term used to describe the foreign policy of a nation, variation across nations explains why isolationism is contested as a concept. [3]

Geographic Context[edit]

The geographic context of nations is a criteria set which revolves around the position within the international state system of any empirical case. A nation is able to withdraw from participating in regional foreign affairs but simultaneously participate in foreign affairs in another region and therefore not isolate itself. A nation can only be deemed isolationist if it were to withdraw from all foreign affairs and limit itself to domestic politics and domestic participation.

Unwillingness to Participate[edit]

Any nation is part of international systeminternational system due to the fact that it simply is not the only nation to exist. Being part of the international system does not require participation in any form and is therefore a passive role. Participation within the international system is seen as a criteria of isolationism. A Nation's withdrawal from participation in this international system is an indicator of isolationism. A nation thus can be deemed isolationist if it is unwilling to participate in foreign affairs or if it withdraws from standing formal agreements; the emphasis is therefore on the voluntary notion of participation. [4]

Ability to Participate[edit]

The ability to participate is a criteria brought forward by the political scientist Bear F. Braumoeller. In his book 'Isolationism in International Relations', he argued that nations that turn to isolationism are not only unwilling to act but also may not be able to get involved in foreign affairs. He discusses Burma to exemplify this line of argument. [5] Burma was unable to get involved in international trade as it lacked infrastructure to do so, thus making involvement impossible.

Motivation Behind Isolationism[edit]

Nations that turn to isolationism are motivated to do so by a perceived benefit that will result from its isolation from participation in foreign affairs. Formal agreements made in the international sphere include regulations and limitations that apply to all participants of the agreement. In observed empirical cases of isolationism, the regulations and limitations have led to nations' isolationism. [6]. Motivations that have been observed in the past with regards to those empirical cases of isolationism are classified and include one or more of the following factors; ideology, economic interest, security.

Ideology[edit]

Ideology is a set of principles, values, and beliefs on which a political system, party, or organisation is based on. [7] A conflict of ideology in the international sphere, a dissensus, leads to an incompatibility of interest of all parties involved. The ideology of a nation plays a significant role in determining its foreign policy as nations pursue maintenance and expansion of their principles, values and beliefs.[8] Due to the fact that ideology are fundamental to a nation's strategy, it is a reason for a nation to turn to isolationism in case of such a conflict. [9]

Economic Interest[edit]

The economy of a nation is of great importance to it and its preservation. Without economic growth, a nation is not able to sustain itself and will fall. [10] Nations aim to maximise their economic interests and create policies according to those economic interests. Within the international sphere, alliances and formal agreements between nations include economic and/or environmental restrictions on the parties involved. Trade agreements and environmental restrictions limit the ability of nations to maximise their output. The aforementioned restrictive policies would lead to them not being able to control their economy. Conflicting policies with regards to economic restrictions play a large role in foreign policies and are observed to be a motivation for a nation to withdraw from alliances or formal agreements; isolationism.[11]

Security[edit]

National security is central to the preservation of any nation and is thus vital in both domestic and foreign policy making. The security dilemma is a term used in international relations and refers to a situation in which, under anarchy, actions by a state intended to heighten its security, such as increasing its military strength, committing to use weapons or making alliances, can lead other states to respond with similar measures, producing increased tensions that create conflict, even when no side desires it. This security dilemma is the underlying problem which motivates a nation to withdraw from formal agreements in regards to security. This withdrawal from formal security agreements is a consequence of not coming to an agreement that satisfies all parties. North Korea's withdrawal from the Nonproliferation Treaty exemplifies how isolationism results from the dissensus with regards to international formal agreements of security. [12]

Empirical cases of Isolationism[edit]

China (1390 - 1644)[edit]

Main article: Haijin

After Zheng He's voyages in the 15th century, the foreign policy of the Ming dynasty in China became increasingly isolationist. The Hongwu Emperor was the first to propose the policy to ban all maritime shipping in 1390.[13] The Qing dynasty that came after the Ming dynasty continued the Ming dynasty's isolationist policies until 1644 when the Ming dynasty was overthrown. The initiation of foreign affairs only occurred much later in the 1800's when China had no choice but to participate as western politics involved itself with China. China thus pursued isolationist policies under the Qing and Ming dynasty by withdrawing from foreign affairs and removing themselves from participation in alliances, political treaties, and economic treaties. [14]

Japan (1641 - 1853)[edit]

Main article: Sakoku

This empirical case is a contested idea of isolationism as it does not meet all general criteria of isolationism. From 1641 to 1853, the Tokugawa shogunate's foreign policy, kaikun, prohibited most communication with other nations. Japan maintained limited-scale trade and diplomatic relations with China, Korea and Ryukyu Islands, as well as the Dutch Republic as the only Western trading partner of Japan for much of the period. However, Japan withdrew from all other formal agreements in the international sphere. This period is thus regarded as isolationist[15][16]. Japan was thus not entirely isolationist,

North Korea (1961 - Present)[edit]

Main article: Juche

Following the division of the peninsula after independence from Japan in 1945–48, Kim il-Sung inaugurated an isolationist totalitarian regime in the North, which has been continued by his son and grandson as predecessors. Though popular belief, North Korea was never isolationist until the introduction of the Juche ideology, an ideology that promoted self-reliance, and the collapse of the Eastern Block. The collapse of the Eastern block meant the dissolution of most remaining formal international ties that North Korea had. At present, North Korea has withdrawn all foreign affairs except for ties with remaining communist outposts such as Cuba. [17].

Paraguay (1814 - 1840)[edit]

José Gaspar Rodríguez de Francia was the dictator of Paraguay from 1814 until 1840, the year he died. He prohibited all forms of international trade and closed Paraguay's borders until the end of his rule. International travel was strictly forbidden isolating the people from Paraguay even further. [18]The few people who were able to come to Paraguay from other countries could not leave the country for the remainder of Francia's rule. During this time, Paraguay fostered domestic industries in order to be self-sufficient and thus was able to maintain isolationist. [19] Francia's foreign policy is considered isolationist as it withdrew from all foreign affairs and rejected any form of international trade. During Francia's rule, Paraguay had no formal ties to another nation.

United States[edit]

Main article: United States non-interventionism § Isolationism Between the World Wars

The United States' isolationist history is widely contested amongst scholars. Robert J. Art argued that the United States has an isolationist history. He This was contested by different scholars who suggested that the United States institutionalises unilateralism or non-interventionism.[20][21] Both sides claim policy prescriptions from George Washington's Farewell Address as evidence for their argument.[20][21] Bear F. Braumoeller argues that even the best case for isolationism, the United States in the interwar period, has been widely misunderstood, where Americans proved willing to fight as soon as they believed a genuine threat existed.[22]

See also[edit]

Wikiquote has quotations related to Uva honeybadger/sandbox.

Works cited[edit]

  1. ^ (Sullivan, Michael P., "Isolationism." World Book Deluxe 2001. CD-ROM.)
  2. ^ (Braumoeller, B., (2010). The Myth of American Isolationism Foreign Policy. Cambridge: Harvard University.)
  3. ^ (Braumoeller, B., (2010). The Myth of American Isolationism Foreign Policy. Cambridge: Harvard University.)
  4. ^ (Dictionary definition - https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/isolationism)
  5. ^ (Braumoeller, B., (2010). The Myth of American Isolationism Foreign Policy. Cambridge: Harvard University.)
  6. ^ (Raines, T. (2015). ‘’Internationalism or Isolationism?’’, The Royal Institute of International Affairs)
  7. ^ (Dictionary definition of Ideology - https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/ideology)
  8. ^ (Sylvan, D., (2008), Ideology and Intervention),
  9. ^ (OH (Office of the Historian) (2017). ‘’Milestones in the History of U.S. Foreign Relations’’)
  10. ^ (Palmer, N., (2012). The Importance of Economic Growth.)
  11. ^ (Petersen, T., (2017). US economic isolation hurts the global economy)
  12. ^ (Arms Control Association, (2020)., Chronology of U.S.-North Korean Nuclear and Missile Diplomacy)
  13. ^ Vo Glahn, Richard. [1996] (1996). Pit of Money: money and monetary policy in China, c. 1000–1700. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-20408-5
  14. ^ Vo Glahn, Richard. [1996] (1996). Pit of Money: money and monetary policy in China, c. 1000–1700. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-20408-5
  15. ^ 400 jaar handel – Four centuries of Japanese–Dutch trade relations: 1609–2009 Archived 2008-01-11 at the Wayback Machine
  16. ^ Ronald P. Toby, State and Diplomacy in Early Modern Japan: Asia in the Development of the Tokugawa Bakufu, Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, (1984) 1991.
  17. ^ (History of North Korea - https://www.libertyinnorthkorea.org/learn-north-korea-history/)
  18. ^ (Williams, J. (1972). Paraguayan Isolation under Dr. Francia: A Re-Evaluation. The Hispanic American Historical Review, 52(1), 102-122.)
  19. ^ (José de Francia's dictatorship - https://www.britannica.com/biography/Jose-Gaspar-Rodriguez-de-Francia)
  20. ^ a b Art, Robert J. (2004). A grand strategy for America. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press. pp. 172–73. ISBN 9780801489570.
  21. ^ a b McDougall, Walter A. (1998). Promised land, crusader state : the American encounter with the world since 1776. Boston, Mass.: Houghton Mifflin. pp. 39–40. ISBN 978-0395901328.
  22. ^ Braumoeller, Bear F. (2010) "The Myth of American Isolationism." Foreign Policy Analysis 6: 349–71.

References[edit]


[Category:International relations theory]] [[Category:Isolationism| ]]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Uva_honeybadger/sandbox&oldid=963549324"