@article{article_641234, title={Double Standards in Recent American Foreign Policy}, journal={The Turkish Yearbook of International Relations}, pages={133–152}, year={1982}, DOI={10.1501/Intrel_0000000157}, author={Ataöv, Türkkaya}, keywords={Double Standard, Recent American, Foreign Policy}, abstract={<p>A number of vvriters consider anarchy as the fundamental fact of <br />international relations.1 <br /> Linked to the Hobbesian analogy, they see it as a <br />chaotic arena of "war of ali against ali." The inference is that authority and <br />order are lacking. Described as "political realism," this approach claims to <br />analyze a number of social concepts such as human nature, interest, power <br />and character of international affairs and exhibits a tendency to treat lack of <br />democracy in relations betvveen nations and even aggressive foreign policy as <br />the inevitable products of reaiity, vvhether one likes it or not. It is deduced, <br />then, that vvithin this context, the history of international relations is, in <br />fact, a struggle for domination. This pursuit, vvhich may look to some <br />commentators as a curtailment, raises the doctrine to the status of a <br />"universal truth." The bases of this interpretation are so vvidely described that <br />they encompass, at times, theories of morality or social and economic <br />doctrines. For instance, vvhile an undemocratic leader of a client country may <br />be portrayed as a statesman responsible to his people, another one, equally <br />undemocratic or even duly elected by his citizens and responsive to their <br />needs, may be presented in negative images. Similarly, laissez-faire <br />between capital and labour in the domestic sphere and market economy in the <br />international realm are the paradise of the economically strong. <br /> </p>}, number={21}, publisher={Ankara Üniversitesi}