What was george hw bushs foreign policy

But not the only role. Bush sent his diplomats around the world and to the UN in search of allies. He opened his global Rolodex and marshaled an unprecedented coalition of 39 countries, including Britain and France, Czechoslovakia, Syria, Niger, and Pakistan. After hours of ground combat, victory was at hand. Kuwait was liberated, and Vietnam Syndrome was finally quelled. He passed off trouble in the Balkans and an ultimately disastrous Somalia operation to Bill Clinton.

And the caution that generally served so well also sometimes rendered him impervious to the winds of change, as when he railed against nationalism in Ukraine, only to see that country realize independence months later. He sought not to roll geopolitical dice but rather to consider fully the consequences of both action and inaction.

He seemingly wished to be judged not only on the victories accrued—Panama, Iraq, NAFTA , Germany, the Cold War—but also tragedies avoided: the wars not commenced, the chaos not unleashed, the blood and treasure saved rather than squandered. These were just as vital to a prudent foreign policy president.

But with the world in dramatic transformation, and with the geopolitical stakes at their very height, George H. In December, President Bush put forth a proposal to ensure that the administration had exhausted all diplomatic efforts; he wanted war to be the last resort. Bush proposed sending Secretary of State Baker to meet with Hussein in Iraq to try to reach a solution.

However, the President made it clear that there was no alternative to a complete and unconditional Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait. Although Baker eventually met with Iraqi foreign minister Tariq Aziz in Geneva, Switzerland, the negotiations went nowhere with Hussein rebuffing Bush's efforts. The administration also wanted to shore up support domestically for the impending military action so it turned to Congress for congressional authorization. Although some in the administration argued that it was unnecessary, others felt it was important to have Congress's support.

On January 12, Congress narrowly voted to authorize the use of military force against Iraq. The vote was an important victory for President Bush. The coalition launched the ground war on February 24 and quickly overwhelmed the Iraqi forces. Coalition troops reached Kuwait City by February 27, and a ceasefire was declared the next day. The war had ended in less than two months, and the Bush administration had successfully committed to the largest military action since the Vietnam War without getting bogged down or suffering high casualties.

One hundred and forty eight U. On March 6, President Bush addressed a joint session of Congress and declared, "tonight Kuwait is free. The Persian Gulf War helped restore the morale of the U. It also showed the possibility of what Bush referred to as the "New World Order," breaking down Cold War alliances and using peaceful nations to stand united against rogue states. The President successfully held together the coalition and even succeeded in having many of the coalition countries provide manpower including France, Britain, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt and financial support including Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Japan, and Germany.

Critics argued, however, that the victory was hollow because Saddam Hussein remained in power. They faulted Bush for not pursuing Hussein and his army into Iraq and removing him from power. However, President Bush and his team had been clear from the beginning that their primary war aim was to make Iraq withdraw from Kuwait, and they achieved that goal. The removal of Hussein from power had never been one of the administration's war aims. Many in the administration argued that pursuing Hussein into Iraq and attempting to topple him from power would destabilize the region and lead to a lengthy military engagement.

On September 11, , President Bush addressed a joint session of Congress regarding the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, and he discussed "an historic period of cooperation," which he called the New World Order. Bush claimed this new order would be:. Again, on January 16, , in an address to the nation about the start of the Persian Gulf War, President Bush used the term in explaining the motivations and justifications for using force against Iraq: We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations a new world order—a world where the rule of law, not the law of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations.

When we are successful—and we will be—we have a real chance at this new world order, an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfill the promise and vision of the U.

President Bush's New World Order involved collective security with multinational cooperation, and it broke down Cold War conceptions and created new allies. Many people debated whether the New World Order was a realistic foreign policy tenet or simply an idealistic approach to the future. Critics claimed that the Bush administration did not fully articulate the goals of the New World Order and how it hoped to accomplish them.

Some were unsure whether the term was meant as a new approach or simply a catchphrase. Realists complained that it was hard to justify U. But others felt that once the Cold War ended, the United States had to take on a large role as a world leader to guard against human rights abuses, defend democratic regimes, and lead humanitarian efforts.

One example of the changing landscape of foreign policy was evident in the Middle East Peace process. In October , the Bush administration, together with the Soviet Union and Spain, cosponsored a conference in Madrid, to try to reach consensus on moving the peace process forward. Arab nations were more willing to work with the United States, and the thwarting of the Iraqi invasion had shown all participants the futility of force.

Although the Madrid conference did not result in any lasting agreements, it was an important step toward future peace agreements.

In Somalia and the former Yugoslavia, the Bush administration encountered some of the first challenges to the New World Order. Near the end of his term, President Bush committed U. Although the operation was initially successful in helping to feed the Somali people, President Bill Clinton ordered the withdrawal of U.

When Yugoslavia began to break apart, the Bush administration had hoped to persuade the various players to avoid violence and bloodshed and proceed with the breakup using a democratic process. The administration also hoped to see the European Community take the lead in resolving a conflict occurring in its own backyard, especially because some European countries seemed to chaff under U.

And although the United States worked with the EC and the UN to take political, diplomatic, and economic steps to try to stop the conflict from escalating, they were unsuccessful. Many of President Bush's advisers felt that military action in the former Yugoslavia would more likely resemble the morass of Vietnam rather than the success of the Persian Gulf War. When President Bush left office, the former Yugoslavia republics were in the midst of wars that would continue for years to come.

Home United States U. Africa 54 - November 11, VOA Africa Listen live. VOA Newscasts Latest program. VOA Newscasts. Bush variety, might have been in order. Above all, what distinguished George H. Bush was political courage. With a few exceptions, he refused to taint policy with politics though his Willie Horton ad in the election campaign against Michael Dukakis is one exception—it played to American racism and fear in ways that have become all too familiar. And Bush was always honest enough to second-guess himself.

In that arena as well, he was only doing what he thought was right: tackling the huge Reagan deficit. Above all, Bush senior seemed all too ready to see the world as gray rather than black and white. Though he was a man of principle, he appeared to lack a sense of certainty. But, the truth is, the world is mostly gray. And one thing is certain: We could do with a lot more of that quality—and of George H. Michael Hirsh is a senior correspondent at Foreign Policy.

Twitter: michaelphirsh. Everyone's favorite historical analogy makes for disastrous foreign policy today. Shusha was the key to the recent war between Azerbaijan and Armenia. Now Baku wants to turn the fabled fortress town into a resort.