US foreign Policy towards China under George W Bush

Introduction

In America, during a presidential election campaign, it is not common for foreign policy issues play a central role, or even important, in the voters. During the course of the last presidential campaign, the subject of foreign policy was far from the central concerns of Americans. As in almost every presidential election factors that are critical for voters in general are the candidates' positions on domestic policy, especially in areas related to the economy. Foreign policy comes before the party affiliation of the candidate, jurisdiction assumed by a party or the other to manage the affairs of state, and links to social, ethnic, regional, or religious, that can unite the voter and the candidate, not to mention the feelings aroused by the personality of the candidates (for more and more publicity).

Nevertheless, the position of a candidate on foreign policy remains a key figure style imposed during an election campaign. She appears in a few speeches traditionally held on the subject, during tournaments that are political talk shows, in party platforms voted to their national conventions, the answers to reporters, and the ideas presented by the candidate's closest advisers. The previous policy performance is also an index. There are also the broad guidelines that emerge during the hearings of Senate committees, hearings prior to confirmation of the two foreign ministers and defense appointed by the President. From these data we can already draw, at least in outline, the foreign policy of George W. Bush, Jr. We can refine these traits in the opposing positions taken by its main rival Al Gore.

Discussion and Analysis

Initially it must be remembered that candidates from both major parties had in common. There is first an ideological consensus, built on a foundation Liberal. This consensus is rarely questioned. There are also institutions that weigh in on the limit all the candidates' proposals. Ideology and institutions, as well as interest and strategic economic course provide an essential continuity in foreign policy. Both candidates, like their predecessors of the two major parties in recent history, were internationalists, supporters of free trade and globalization, a strong defense and guarantee of the same core values ??America.

But then one must ask how a change of president and even a change in the composition of Congress involve changes in foreign policy. He is not here to suggest that any changes will be minimal, only that the system imposes certain limits. That said, this is when a presidential election that U.S. citizens exercise the most direct influence on foreign policy, because by choosing a president, the voter manifests his preference for seeing the world that it is expressed by one or other of the two candidates. Between elections, it is rather the other power centers that play a decisive role. At their head are the interest groups, and even abused commonly called "lobbies" in France (some groups are, of course, more influential than others). There are also journalists, universities and research institutes (think tanks) public opinion polls ...