Introduction
There are several policies that can be developed by a country depending on the prevailing situation and needs or requirements at that particular time. Policies are developed by a national administration in response to different reasons, for instance, security economic and social factors or reasons among others. Basically, a policy is a proposed or adopted course of action or principle. Policies are developed with objectives or goals to achieve. Policies can be local or foreign. There are several policies that were developed by the United States’ administration during the cold war period. They were basically adopted to boost both security and the economic situation of the United States in foreign countries. Policies developed should be applicable for both short-term and long-term periods. There are several policies developed by Eisenhower and Dulles during their time in office as both President and secretary of state respectively. This paper critically evaluates the policy developed by Eisenhower and Dulles.
History of policies developed by Eisenhower and Dulles
Eisenhower was the United States president during the cold war. During this time, it was immediately after the Second World War and several States involved in the war were still in tension and threat of foreign attacks. At the same time, the United States secretary of states was Dulles. In the United States, the main administrators on policies basically are the president and the secretary of state. Immediately after the World War II, United States emerged victorious and was considered the world super power alongside the USSR. However, they had to develop policies that could allow them to up hold their status in the globe politically and economically .
During the reign of Eisenhower and Dulles, communism was on the rise and Soviet Union greatly supported it. On the other hand, the United States was opposed to the idea and developed a strategic policy to control spread of the idea and its adoption in the country and foreign countries where it sought to enhance its influence and security. Therefore, the United States administration adopted the containment policy. This was a policy that required the nation (United States) to use diplomatic strategies, economic and military strategies to stall spread of communism and prevent “domino effect” . The policy was developed in response to the desire of the Soviet Union to enlarge the communist influence in China, Vietnam, Eastern Europe and Korea. The United States used the policy until the end of 1989 when cold war ended. The administration developed the strategy because it felt it threatened their position and influence globally, but favored Russians. To reinforce the containment policy, the United States during the years of Eisenhower and Dulles adopted the massive retaliation policy. This policy was a threat to launch attack on communist Chinese or Soviet upon attack of any country. The policy was applied by the United States to win peace globally .
Evaluation of the US foreign policy during Eisenhower and Dulles years
The massive retaliation policy adopted by the United States under Eisenhower administration greatly assisted in several ways. The policy was considered successful due to several reasons, but at the same it had other several setbacks. This is because strategies or policies cannot be effective, but what vary are the disadvantages of the respective policy or strategy. Effective policies ought to address both long-term and short-term objectives. During this period, communism was on the rise in most countries and it was basically supported by the Russians, but opposed by the United States administration. This was despite their alignment during the Second World War. It was during the cold war and they had differences, but feared engaging in war due to the effects of the Second World War on most countries. This is because most countries lost either politically or economically, but economic effects were greater .
Virtues and successes of the policy
The policy adopted by the United States was successful in several ways and greatly assisted in the avoidance of an eruption of war. Russia was supporting communism having gone through a communism revolution. However, the United States opposed it due to the effects it could have on democracy and capitalism and its interests. Therefore, the policy helped in protecting Western Europe from any advances by the Russians. This is because the Russians feared a massive nuclear attack hence could not make any military advancement on any country especially Western Europe . During this period, it was the cold war and it never involved any massive attack, but conventional attacks. Basically, massive attacks could lead to loss of several properties and even lead to major war. However, the Soviet Union was not prepared for any major war at the time hence refrained from any military advances on other countries . Therefore, the policy served best United States’ interest in the short-run at that time.
The policy was greatly successful in restoring the global peace especially after the World War II. Immediately after the world war, cold war erupted and several states were afraid of a repeat of a world war any time soon due to the effects of the war. However, the cold war threatened break up of a third world war soon, and this threatened the global peaceful co-existence . Massive retaliation policy greatly helped in restoring peace and limited any chances of military advancements hence promoting peace. This is because this raised tension on Soviet Union and feared the United States might launch a massive nuclear attack on them upon military advancement on any nation .
Furthermore, the policy greatly helped the United States achieve its mission of enforcing good relation, reinforcing security and increasing their influence globally. The policy inculcated fear in Soviet Union and hence could not launch military advancement on any state due to fear of Massive retaliation. This greatly enhanced and promoted peace globally. This portrayed the United States as the peace maker to other states globally, because the policy they developed protected them from military advancements by the Soviet Union. After the declaration of adoption of the policy, there were no major military advancements on other states by the Soviet Union until the cold war ended in 1989. Moreover, this portrayed United States as the world savior on peace missions and increased their influence globally .
Moreover, this increased influence of the United States because it earned it respect from the feared Soviet Union hence other countries globally recognized united states as the sole super power. It also helped in enhancing security globally. Furthermore, the strategy greatly assisted the United States to advance economically and expand their trade circles. This is because most countries preferred trading with the United States during this time to avoid attack and be assured of protection in case of attacks from the communist Chinese and the Soviet Union .
Defects and setbacks of the policy
The massive attack policy developed by the United States during the reign of Eisenhower as president, and Dulles as the secretary of state greatly helped United States achieve several goals. However, the policy also had several setbacks and defects. This policy was developed and adopted by the United States, but at the same time the country was not also ready for any major war hence could not practically launch a massive attack on Soviet Union or the communist Chinese. There are other setbacks of the policy that could not lead to realistic application .
The policy was developed to assist the country uphold the containment policy. However, it was based on massive nuclear attack on other nations, but the containment policy also recognized diplomacy. Moreover all foreign policy challenges cannot be dealt with using the massive military attacks. The policy is also hard to be made credible and lacks flexibility. Basically, policies should be developed and adopted with consideration to the future (Tudda 2006). They should also be able to be used for long-term purposes. However, the massive attack possible was not long-term and cannot be used to solve other foreign policy challenges. This is because the United States also had to fund the attack hence incur extra cost .
Formulation and execution of policies requires finances. Change of a policy requires more finances so as to familiarize with the policy. The massive attack policy had to be abandoned immediately after the end of cold war in 1989. However, global peace was still at stake and this requires another policy or strategy to enforce this and ensure peaceful co-existence . This is because United States adopted the policy to increase their global influence and enhance security. However, the policy could not be applicable after the end of the cold and lack of military advancement possibility of the Soviet Union to other states .
Furthermore, United States required increasing their influence globally, but the massive attack policy was meant for short-term purposes. Furthermore, world security and protection of their business circles was also at stake because these are long-term aspects. The policy could not be applicable for long-term because Soviet Union was recovering from the effects of the world war and could soon be able to launch an attack and defend itself from massive attack . Secondly, the policy was applicable at that time because Russia lacked nuclear weapons. However, presently technology has advanced and this has led to acquisition of nuclear weapons by several countries hence this policy could not be used to effectively protect the long-term interest of the United States especially on global influence and security reasons .
Moreover, the policy could not be applicable on the long-term though effective policies ought to serve long-term goals or purposes. United States adopted the massive attack policy on foreign policies; however, this could not be successful in case the Soviet Union adopted the massive response policy. This is because it could lead to unlimited escalation. The policy was not also flexible and lacked alternative in case it failed. Therefore, the massive attack policy adopted by Eisenhower and Dulles was only short-term and not long-term .
Conclusion
Effective policies ought to serve both long-term and short-term interests. Developments of policies that serve strictly short-term interests are not effective, but ought to have alternatives. Policies developed and adopted ought to have alternatives in case of failure and contribute to long-term objectives. However, massive attack strategy or policy adopted by United States during the reign of Eisenhower was not effective because it was only effective for short-term purposes and lacked alternatives.
