International Contexts

The School of the Americas very much eludes to the idea of Isolationism when it comes to the US and foreign military affairs. If not even to that extreme, Gill seems to blame all of Latin American struggles on the US and The School of the Americas (which is 100% also the fault of the US, according to Gill). As an American, this one in particular was hard to read, but for the specific cited examples in history, I understand the authors frustration. This sentence found on page 5 “many U.S. citizens have cheered its progress [US road to imperial power] along the way or lived behind a wall of self-absorbed denial and ignorance about the consequences of U.S. foreign policy” really encapsulates the whole introduction. I think since 2004, this sentence is no longer true, as many Americans are more well informed, however in a more global sense and overall picture, I don’t think citizens ever truly know the ongoings of a big government – one of it’s many pitfalls. Also, to further criticize that point, all people are in denial and ignorant if they choose to be/don’t stay informed, this is not a fact special to American citizens.

Comparatively, Schoultz also views America as power hungry and ever trying to dominate. Furthermore alike, this paper has a negative view of American citizens themselves. Whether true or not, I think an inference can be made that most people looking from the outside feel similarly. The question that arises, I think, is where to appropriately assign “blame” for lack of a better word. Schoultz does a more holistic take on this as he recognizes wrongdoings in multiple areas outside the US.

Looking forward, both readings address future issues and questions to be answered. I like how Shoultz connects Cuban voting rights to America from which many emigrated. There is no doubt that a shaky relationship between the two countries exist, but cooperation seems to be the best way to move forward. Obama (somewhat) proved that by working with Cuba in person on visits that past presidents refused to do. US policy, if following Obama’s example, could be more friendly and unleash fewer hostilities. This is a conclusion I very much agree with in the Shoultz article. With that, I disagree with Gill’s more negative take that 9/11 produced a type of “moral and political climate” that basically made irreversible hatred between everyone, if I understood Gill’s conclusion correctly.