Double Standards in Recent American Foreign Policy

Abstract

Double Standards in Recent American Foreign Policy

Abstract

A number of vvriters consider anarchy as the fundamental fact of
international relations.1
Linked to the Hobbesian analogy, they see it as a
chaotic arena of "war of ali against ali." The inference is that authority and
order are lacking. Described as "political realism," this approach claims to
analyze a number of social concepts such as human nature, interest, power
and character of international affairs and exhibits a tendency to treat lack of
democracy in relations betvveen nations and even aggressive foreign policy as
the inevitable products of reaiity, vvhether one likes it or not. It is deduced,
then, that vvithin this context, the history of international relations is, in
fact, a struggle for domination. This pursuit, vvhich may look to some
commentators as a curtailment, raises the doctrine to the status of a
"universal truth." The bases of this interpretation are so vvidely described that
they encompass, at times, theories of morality or social and economic
doctrines. For instance, vvhile an undemocratic leader of a client country may
be portrayed as a statesman responsible to his people, another one, equally
undemocratic or even duly elected by his citizens and responsive to their
needs, may be presented in negative images. Similarly, laissez-faire
between capital and labour in the domestic sphere and market economy in the
international realm are the paradise of the economically strong.

Keywords

• Double Standard
• Recent American
• Foreign Policy