In the years 1920 to 1945, to what extent was FD Roosevelt’s approach to international relations different from that of his Republican predecessors?
Level
A Level
Year Examined
2021
Topic
The Making of a Superpower: USA, 1865-1975
👑Complete Model Essay
In the years 1920 to 1945, to what extent was FD Roosevelt’s approach to international relations different from that of his Republican predecessors?
To what extent was FD Roosevelt’s approach to international relations different from that of his Republican predecessors (1920-1945)?
Franklin D. Roosevelt's presidency (1933-1945) marked a significant shift in American foreign policy. Unlike the Republican presidents of the 1920s, who largely favored a "return to normalcy" and a more isolationist approach, Roosevelt emerged as an ardent internationalist. He believed that many domestic issues could be addressed through a robust international agenda. This essay will argue that while some continuities existed, Roosevelt's approach to international relations differed significantly from his predecessors' in its proactive engagement, strategic interventionism, and commitment to collective security.
Breaking from Isolationism: Roosevelt's Proactive Engagement
Roosevelt's approach diverged sharply from the prevailing isolationist sentiment of the 1920s. While his predecessors were hesitant to engage in international affairs, Roosevelt actively sought to shape the global landscape. His "Good Neighbor" policy towards Latin America, building upon Hoover's earlier efforts, aimed to foster cooperation and reduce US interventionism in the region. Moreover, despite facing domestic pressure for neutrality as World War II erupted in Europe, Roosevelt recognized the threat posed by Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. He skillfully maneuvered around isolationist sentiment, pushing for the Lend-Lease Act in 1941. This program provided crucial material aid to Britain and other Allied nations, effectively aligning the US with them while technically maintaining neutrality. This decisive action contrasted starkly with the more passive approach of the 1920s, demonstrating Roosevelt's willingness to involve the US in international affairs when he deemed it necessary.
Navigating Complexities: Strategic Interventionism
Roosevelt's foreign policy extended beyond simply engaging with other nations; it involved strategic interventionism to safeguard American interests. A prime example was his handling of relations with the Soviet Union. Despite the longstanding hostility between the two nations, fostered by ideological differences and the US's non-recognition of the Soviet government after the Bolshevik Revolution, Roosevelt recognized the strategic importance of collaboration against Nazi Germany. He formally established diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union in 1933 and cultivated a pragmatic partnership with Stalin during World War II. This pragmatic approach, prioritizing national interest over ideological rigidity, differed significantly from the staunch anti-communism of his Republican predecessors.
Building a New World Order: Collective Security and the United Nations
Roosevelt's commitment to international cooperation extended beyond the immediate exigencies of war. He envisioned a postwar world order founded on collective security and international institutions. His advocacy for US membership in the World Court in 1935, although unsuccessful, demonstrated his early commitment to this vision. Furthermore, Roosevelt played a pivotal role in the creation of the United Nations, recognizing its potential as a forum for resolving international disputes peacefully and fostering global cooperation. This active engagement in shaping the postwar international order marked a significant departure from the more isolationist tendencies of the 1920s.
Continuities and Constraints
However, it is essential to acknowledge that some continuities existed between Roosevelt's foreign policy and that of his predecessors. While he recognized the threat posed by Japan's growing military power in the Pacific, his administration, like those before him, struggled to formulate an effective response. The US continued to rely on diplomatic and economic pressure, proving unwilling to risk a direct military confrontation with Japan in the 1930s. This suggests that even Roosevelt was constrained by prevailing public opinion and political realities. Similarly, the Neutrality Acts passed in the 1930s, while later circumvented by Roosevelt, highlighted the persistent strength of isolationist sentiment within the US.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while elements of continuity existed, Franklin D. Roosevelt's approach to international relations differed significantly from that of his Republican predecessors. His proactive engagement in global affairs, strategic interventionism, and commitment to collective security through institutions like the United Nations marked a decisive shift from the more isolationist tendencies of the 1920s. Roosevelt guided the United States from a position of relative detachment to one of global leadership, laying the groundwork for the country's role as a superpower in the postwar world. His presidency remains a testament to the transformative potential of dynamic and forward-looking leadership in international relations.
Note: History Study Pack Required
Score Big with Perfectly Structured History Essays!
Prepare effortlessly for your A/AS/O-Level exams with our comprehensive...
History Study Pack.
✅ 1200+ Model Essays: Master your essay writing with expertly crafted answers to past paper questions.
✅ Exam Boards Covered: Tailored materials for AQA, Cambridge, and OCR exams.
🍃 Free Essay Plan
Essay Outline: FDR's International Relations vs. Republican Predecessors, 1920-1945
This essay will assess the extent to which Franklin D. Roosevelt's approach to international relations differed from that of his Republican predecessors in the period 1920-1945. While arguments exist for continuity in American foreign policy, this essay will argue that FDR's approach marked a significant shift toward active internationalism, particularly in response to the escalating global crises of the 1930s and the Second World War.
Argument 1: FDR's Shift to Internationalism
Thesis Statement: FDR's approach to international relations differed significantly from his Republican predecessors, marked by a shift towards active internationalism and a willingness to engage in international affairs to address global challenges.
Evidence:
⭐Active Interventionism: FDR's support for Britain and its allies through Lend-Lease, despite claims of neutrality, marked a dramatic departure from the earlier isolationist stance.
⭐Collective Security: FDR's advocacy for US membership in the World Court and his key role in establishing the United Nations demonstrate his commitment to international cooperation and collective security.
⭐Soviet Relations: FDR's establishment of diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union, a major shift from the hostility of the 1920s, reflects a strategic realignment in the face of global threats.
Argument 2: Continuity in American Policy
Thesis Statement: Despite the apparent shift towards internationalism, some aspects of American foreign policy remained consistent under both Republican and Democratic administrations.
Evidence:
⭐Limited Interventionalism: While FDR engaged in active support of allies, the US did not declare war until December 1941, echoing the reluctance of earlier administrations to become directly involved in foreign conflicts.
⭐Neutrality Acts: FDR's enactment of neutrality legislation reflected the lingering isolationist sentiment within the US, echoing the policies of his predecessors in the 1930s.
⭐Latin American Relations: The continuation of the "Good Neighbor Policy" under FDR, building upon Hoover's initiatives, reflects a consistent emphasis on diplomatic engagement in the Western Hemisphere.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while some continuity can be identified in American foreign policy between the 1920s and 1945, FDR's approach represents a significant shift towards active internationalism. Driven by the global crises of the era, FDR's policies prioritized international cooperation and engagement, marking a departure from the more cautious approach of his Republican predecessors. This shift was most evident in his unwavering support for Britain and its allies during the Second World War, his dedication to collective security, and his willingness to pursue diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union.
Extracts from Mark Schemes
Roosevelt's Internationalist Approach
Unlike the Presidents of the 1920s, who favoured a ‘return to normalcy’, Roosevelt was an ardent internationalist and believed that many of the issues within the United States could be solved through a strong international agenda. Roosevelt dramatically altered America’s relationship with the Soviet Union, which had been largely hostile throughout the 1920s, establishing official ties between the two nations. Franklin D Roosevelt bent and broke laws in supporting Britain and America’s other allies while claiming neutrality domestically and abroad. His moves were aggressive and pushed boundaries. Despite the policies of his predecessors and the government’s commitment to neutrality as the Second World War began, FD Roosevelt worked resolutely to enact the programme of Lend-Lease. FD Roosevelt’s commitment to international cooperation came with his fight for ‘collective security’. For example, in 1935 he fought for US membership in the World Court. FD Roosevelt played a key role in creating the United Nations and by 1945, America was firmly involved with European affairs.
Similarities in Foreign Policy
Students may argue that foreign policy was similar throughout the period. American foreign policy was far from isolationist in the 1920s and was equally engaged in world affairs throughout FD Roosevelt’s period in office. Although the United States did not join the League of Nations, it did cooperate with international agencies throughout the 1920s and into the 1930s. In the 1920s, the United States was concerned about the growing military power of Japan yet little was done; the Roosevelt administration proved no more willing in the intervening years to actively oppose Japanese aggression. Instead, like others before him, Roosevelt merely refused to recognise Japanese control of Manchuria.
During the late 1920s, foreign policy leaders started to argue for a softer tone in US relations with Latin-American nations. This was carried on through FD Roosevelt when he supported the 1933 Pan-American Conference resolution. Students may argue that it was actually due to Hoover’s ‘Good Neighbor policy’ which established a solid foundation on which FD Roosevelt could build. In the 1930s, when Europe and Asia descended into diplomatic crises and wars, FD Roosevelt echoed the 1920s ‘isolationist’ attitude. For example, neutrality Acts were passed that forbade American involvement in foreign conflicts. FD Roosevelt more often than not proved unwilling to buck isolationist sentiment.