The United States (U.S.) foreign policy is a worthy sub-field of International Relations and Political Science. If one looks closely at the U.S. foreign policy, then it will be visible that it has certain traditions, which time and again dominate and overshadow the entire decision-making process. In this regard, there is an important tradition in the U.S. foreign policy called the American Exceptionalism.
It would not be wrong to assume that the American Exceptionalism is the master narrative that continues to outshine its foreign policy outlook as well as conduct. However, throughout America’s history, the American Exceptionalism was portrayed as the most vital instrument that encouraged or perhaps provoked its global interventionist behaviour. This article will examine the American Exceptionalism, highlight the interventionist behaviour, and will also underscore the most deadly outcome it has yielded over the course of modern history.
The Neo-Conservatives (Neo-Cons) in the U.S. foreign policy circles are the most influential group of people, who are bound together to pursue common objectives. They have already encroached in almost every power corridor in the U.S. and are responsible for starting wars, overthrowing governments, initiating false revolutions, spreading fake news, promoting homosexuality, and constantly demonising every anti-American element throughout the globe.
What is American Exceptionalism?
There are two basic strands of American Exceptionalism.
- America as an exemplar state – “Global Exceptionalism”
- America as a missionary nation – “Messianic Exceptionalism”
Perhaps, for the most readers, the American Exceptionalism might be something new, or they may find it a novel idea. Nonetheless, to understand American Exceptionalism, it is important to explore the narrative behind it. The American Exceptionalism is a self-created, wrongly conceived, unnecessarily dominant, and is based on absolute hubris. The foundations of the American Exceptionalism were wrongly interpreted using historical developments. For example, the contemporary population of the U.S. comprises more than 90 percent of the European settlers, which migrated to the Thirteen Colonies to avoid the war torn European continent. A large portion of the European settlers migrated to avoid the rampant religious persecution. Also, the European traders were constantly extorted by the Kings to support their respective military campaigns, so trade was an important consideration to migrating. Hence, driven by these considerations, in the early seventeenth century, a large European population, including the Jews, migrated to the Thirteen Colonies.
In 1630, a Christian Priest named as John Winthrop was so excited to have evaded the violence on the European continent that he called America as the New Jerusalem and said that the God had given them a city upon a hill. Even today, the Americans call Washington, D.C. as the Capital Hill.
The Wrong Concept of ‘Manifest Destiny’
In 1845, an American journalist named as John O’Sullivan used the term “Manifest Destiny,” and wrote an essay titled as “Annexation” in the July-August (1845) issue of The United States Magazine and Democratic Review. Sullivan advocated in the favour of the annexation and acquisition of Texas and asserted that the “fulfilment of our manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions.” Consequently, this idea became the cornerstone to defend and justify the annexation of Texas-Oregon, and the dispute with the British, and later the U.S.-Mexico War in 1846. Apparently, Sullivan’s use of the word ‘providence’ points fingers towards the concept and idea being deeply religious.
John O’Sullivan played a vital role in the expansion of the U.S. towards the West. It was said that it was America’s job to civilise the “Wild Wild West,” and in doing so, millions of Native Americans were killed extra judicially and many more were enslaved for doing the hard labour. In such a way, the settler minority enslaved the indigenous majority. In modern times, it is also referred to as Settler Colonialism.
The Global Interventionist Behaviour
As mentioned earlier, the American Exceptionalism and its propagators are responsible for starting wars, overthrowing governments, initiating false revolutions, spreading fake news, promoting homosexuality, and constantly demonising every anti-American element throughout the globe.
During the last 2 decades, under the banner of American Exceptionalism, many governments were overthrown throughout the world, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan. The architects of American Exceptionalism aimed to install democracy and inject liberal values in the political cultures of Iraq and Afghanistan. However, Iraq is still burning and Afghanistan is trying to recover from the two-decades long American illegal occupation.
Another example in the U.S.-led Global War on Terror, which has been raging on for more than 2 decades and still, the American Exceptionalism has made the world more vulnerable towards terrorist threats.
The American Exceptionalism aims to spread liberal democracy around the globe. However, in reality, it is just an excuse to pursue the American interests which are always quite opposite to the interests of the people around the globe.
Conclusion
The contemporary U.S. is the by-product of many illegal annexations and the subsequent acquisitions. However, the American plunder, annexations, and acquisitions were made under the banner of American Exceptionalism. The latter has been projected all around the globe to portray America as a benign power and an exceptional nation that is doing the God’s work.
In reality, the American Exceptionalism is not so exceptional. It is a wrong narrative that is founded upon propaganda and fake news. The American Exceptionalism was used to spread democracy and the liberal values all around the globe, especially by interventionist foreign policy behaviour. America has a long history of interventions and removing the governments, monarchs, military establishments, and even elected governments. Those ruling elites, which gallantly decline to submit before the American demands, are portrayed as despots and the American policymakers leave no stone unturned in overthrowing them. For such purposes, the spreading of democracy and the human rights violations propaganda works quite well, and resultantly the American Exceptionalism justifies the intervention.
Simon Westwood – is a Masters student at the Dublin City University (DCU), Ireland. He is also a Research Assistant at the DCU’s Department of History.