Containment 425279 226005846 2008-07-16T12:17:10Z Epbr123 1395162 Reverted edits by [[Special:Contributions/58.175.137.254|58.175.137.254]] to last version by ClueBot (using [[WP:HG|Huggle]]) {{Cleanup|date=February 2008}} {{Unreferenced|date=December 2007}} {{otheruses1|foreign policy}} '''Containment''' refers to the [[foreign policy]] [[strategy]] of the [[United States]] in the early years of the [[Cold War]]. Its policy was to stop what is called the [[domino theory|domino effect]] of nations moving politically towards [[Soviet Union]]-based [[communism]], rather than [[Europe]]an-American-based [[capitalism]]. ==Containment Policy== The whole point of the Containment Policy was for the United States to keep communism from spreading during the Cold War. Also if the United States failed, then the domino effect would occur with more and more countries falling into the hands of communism. This is one of the reasons the United States fought in the Vietnam, and Korean Wars. == Theory == Containment springs up from the idea that isolation will lead to stagnation. In earlier times, containment was followed as a tactic, rather than a strategy or a policy. Laying a passive [[siege]] to a castle where a powerful or influential lord resided and cutting off the supply lines was a form of containment. This made the lord helpless since his tactical ability was limited with only a few soldiers at his command. Another way to maximize the damage done by containment was, after creating a situation of relative isolation, to [[Subversion (politics)|subvert]] the enemy. In practice, this is achieved using [[espionage]] and sabotage. The anticipated result is that any subversion introduced will have a high cost to the enemy and will take a long time to rectify if left alone, or will consume resources (particularly in the form of security measures) to avoid. This serves the purpose of maintaining a strategic upper hand. Eventually, the United States hoped containment would cause the fall of the Soviet Union and its satellite nations. == Later developments == U.S. containment policy developed into a principled opposition to the Soviet ratcheting of its sphere of influence. However, the policy suffered setbacks, and after the U.S. pullout from the Vietnam conflict, the policy of containment was somewhat discredited. U.S. politicians advanced new theories of “[[détente]]” and “peaceful co-existence”. At the end of the 1970s—believed by some to be an ineffective decade for U.S. foreign policy—the U.S. elected [[Ronald Reagan]] for what became an 8-year term. Reagan took a more aggressive approach to dealings with the USSR, believing that détente was misguided and [[peaceful co-existence]] was tantamount to surrender. Reagan believed the policy of containment did not go far enough. His policies were highly controversial and unpopular in many countries. They included new missile systems in Europe, and significantly, plans for a [[Strategic Defense Initiative]] (SDI), or "Star Wars",would render the U.S. immune to a first strike. Later on, Reagan's actions were interpreted as being aimed at defeating the Soviets by the use of an expensive arms race the Soviets could not match. There is no contemporary evidence, however,this was indeed a planned strategy. It was never formulated as a strategy by anyone within the Reagan government. Reagan also pursued the comprehensive disarmament initiative [[START I]], which would have been completely at odds with a strategy of bankrupting the USSR through an arms race. The [[History of the Soviet Union (1985–1991)#Yeltsin and the dissolution of the Soviet Union|Soviet Union collapsed]] in 1991. This marked the official end of U.S. containment policy, though it kept its bases in the areas around the former Soviet Union, such as ones in Iceland, Germany, and Turkey. (The [[Naval Air Station Keflavik]] in Iceland was closed in September 2006.) [[As of 2005]], the U.S. had at least 700 military bases around the world. Some estimates suggest the real number is much higher. ===Iraq=== A containment policy, was also applied by the U.S. to [[Iraq]] from 1991 to 2003. When [[Saddam Hussein]] was not ousted from power after the [[Gulf War]] the U.S. adopted containment towards Iraq via severe [[Iraq sanctions|sanctions]], U.N. weapons inspections, basing of troops in [[Saudi Arabia]] and [[Kuwait]], patrol of the [[Iraq no-fly zones]], and periodic airstrikes. By 2000, these elements of containment were fraying because Iraq was able to smuggle many prohibited items via [[Jordan]], [[Syria]], [[Turkey]], and [[Iran]]. The [[Oil for Food]] which began in 1996 was also corrupted, and the U.N. withdrew their inspectors in [[1998]] because of Iraqi non-cooperation and were unable to verify whether or not Iraq's prescribed weapons programs were destroyed. The U.N. was divided. Meanwhile, Arab public opinion in [[Saudi Arabia]] and elsewhere became increasingly hostile to the U.S. military presence in their nations because of renewed violence in the [[Israeli-Palestinian conflict]]. After 1998 Iraq began to fire on allied aircraft in the no-fly zones and thus suffered from retaliation via bombing, but such strikes did not threaten Saddam's grip on power. Containment was abandoned by the [[George W. Bush]] administration which opted for regime change via military action in 2003. ===Asia=== In the post-Cold War world, scholars have debated the extent to which containment—or some variant of that strategy—continues to animate U.S. diplomacy, particularly vis-a-vis China. At [http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2005/43655.htm a speech to Tokyo's Sophia University in March 2005], U.S. Secretary of State [[Condoleezza Rice]] paid abundant tribute to Kennan and his intellectual legacy and then elaborated on the logic of the new alliances Washington was building in Asia: "[As] we look to China's life... I really do believe the U.S.-Japan relationship, the U.S.-South Korean relationship, the U.S.-Indian relationship, all are important in creating an environment in which China is more likely to play a positive role than a negative role. These alliances are not against China; they are alliances that are devoted to a stable security and political and economic and, indeed, values-based relationships put China in the context of those relationships, and a different path to development than if China were simply untethered, simply operating without strategic context." ==Further reading== *[[George F. Kennan|Kennan, George F.]], ''American Diplomacy'', The University of Chicago Press. 1984. ISBN 0-226-43147-9 * Wright, Steven. ''The United States and Persian Gulf Security: The Foundations of the War on Terror'', Ithaca Press, 2007 ISBN 978-0863723216 {{Cold War}} {{US Foreign Doctrine}} [[Category:Cold War]] [[da:Containment]] [[de:Containment-Politik]] [[es:Contención]] [[eo:Containment]] [[fa:سد نفوذ]] [[fr:Endiguement]] [[it:Containment]] [[he:תורת הבלימה]] [[nl:Containment-politiek]] [[pl:Doktryna powstrzymywania]] [[ru:Сдерживание]] [[sv:Uppdämning]] [[zh:围堵政策]]