Students will compare and contrast the foreign policy aspects of the Truman, Eisenhower, and Monroe Doctrine using excerpts. This can be done individually, in rotating groups, or in jigsaw/expert groups.
To emphasize and review essential aspects of US foreign policy.
- Review and discover key elements of primary documents regarding foreign policy
- Compare and contrast similarities and differences between time periods, crises, and presidential administrations
- CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.1 Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources, connecting insights gained from specific details to an understanding of the text as a whole.
- CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.2 Determine the central ideas or information of a primary or secondary source; provide an accurate summary that makes clear the relationships among the key details and ideas.
- CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.3 Evaluate various explanations for actions or events and determine which explanation best accords with textual evidence, acknowledging where the text leaves matters uncertain.
- AP Essay Questions and Fact Sheets – includes foreign policy fact sheets for Truman, Eisenhower, and Nixon:
- Encyclopedia Britainica
- Truman Doctrine Excerpt (provided)
Background: Truman Doctrine, pronouncement by U.S. Pres. Harry S. Truman on March 12, 1947, declaring immediate economic and military aid to the governments of Greece, threatened by Communist insurrection, and Turkey, under pressure from Soviet expansion in the Mediterranean area. As the United States and the Soviet Union struggled to reach a balance of power during the Cold War that followed World War II, Great Britain announced that it could no longer afford to aid those Mediterranean countries, which the West feared were in danger of falling under Soviet influence. The U.S. Congress responded to a message from Truman by promptly appropriating $400,000,000 for this purpose.
Excerpt from Transcript of Truman Doctrine (March 12, 1947)
Mr. President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Congress of the United States:
The gravity of the situation … necessitates my appearance before a joint session of the Congress. The foreign policy and the national security of this country are involved.
One aspect of the present situation, … concerns Greece and Turkey.
The United States has received from the Greek Government an urgent appeal for financial and economic assistance. … assistance is imperative if Greece is to survive as a free nation.
Greece is not a rich country. Lack of sufficient natural resources has always forced the Greek people to work hard to make both ends meet. Since 1940, this industrious and peace loving country has suffered invasion, four years of cruel enemy occupation, and bitter internal strife.
When forces of liberation entered Greece they found that the retreating Germans had destroyed virtually all the railways, roads, port facilities, communications, and merchant marine. More than a thousand villages had been burned. Eighty-five per cent of the children were tubercular. Livestock, poultry, and draft animals had almost disappeared. Inflation had wiped out practically all savings.
… Greece is in desperate need of financial and economic assistance to enable it to resume purchases of food, clothing, fuel and seeds. … so essential for economic and political recovery.
The very existence of the Greek state is today threatened by the terrorist activities of several thousand armed men, led by Communists…
Meanwhile, the Greek Government is unable to cope with the situation. The Greek army is small and poorly equipped. It needs supplies and equipment … Greece must have assistance if it is to become a self-supporting and self-respecting democracy.
The United States must supply that assistance. We have already extended to Greece certain types of relief and economic aid but these are inadequate.
There is no other country to which democratic Greece can turn.
No other nation is willing and able to provide the necessary support for a democratic Greek government.
The British Government, which has been helping Greece, can give no further financial or economic aid after March 31.
We have considered how the United Nations might assist in this crisis. But the situation is an urgent one requiring immediate action …
Greece’s neighbor, Turkey, also deserves our attention.
The future of Turkey as an independent and economically sound state is clearly no less important to the freedom-loving peoples of the world than the future of Greece. The circumstances in which Turkey finds itself today are considerably different from those of Greece. …
Nevertheless, Turkey now needs our support.
Since the war Turkey has sought financial assistance from Great Britain and the United States for the purpose of … modernization necessary for the maintenance of its national integrity.
That integrity is essential to the preservation of order in the Middle East.
As in the case of Greece, if Turkey is to have the assistance it needs, the United States must supply it. We are the only country able to provide that help.
One of the primary objectives of the foreign policy of the United States is the creation of conditions in which we and other nations will be able to work out a way of life free from coercion. This was a fundamental issue in the war with Germany and Japan. Our victory was won over countries which sought to impose their will, and their way of life, upon other nations.
At the present moment in world history nearly every nation must choose between alternative ways of life….
One way of life is based upon the will of the majority, and is distinguished by free institutions, representative government, free elections, guarantees of individual liberty, freedom of speech and religion, and freedom from political oppression.
The second way of life is based upon the will of a minority forcibly imposed upon the majority. It relies upon terror and oppression, a controlled press and radio; fixed elections, and the suppression of personal freedoms.
I believe that it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures.
I believe that we must assist free peoples to work out their own destinies in their own way.
It is necessary only to glance at a map to realize that the survival and integrity of the Greek nation are of grave importance in a much wider situation. If Greece should fall under the control of an armed minority, the effect upon its neighbor, Turkey, would be immediate and serious. Confusion and disorder might well spread throughout the entire Middle East.
I therefore ask the Congress to provide authority for assistance to Greece and Turkey in the amount of $400,000,000 for the period ending June 30, 1948.
In addition to funds, I ask the Congress to authorize the detail of American civilian and military personnel to Greece and Turkey, at the request of those countries, to assist in the tasks of reconstruction, and for the purpose of supervising the use of such financial and material assistance…
If further funds, or further authority, should be needed …I shall not hesitate to bring the situation before the Congress. On this subject the Executive and Legislative branches of the Government must work together.
I would not recommend it except that the alternative is much more serious. …This is an investment in world freedom and world peace.
It is only common sense that we should safeguard this investment …
The free peoples of the world look to us for support in maintaining their freedoms.
I am confident that the Congress will face these responsibilities squarely.
- Eisenhower Doctrine Excerpt (provided)
Background: Eisenhower Doctrine, (Jan. 5, 1957), in the Cold War period after World War II, U.S. foreign-policy pronouncement by President Dwight D. Eisenhower promising military or economic aid to any Middle Eastern country needing help in resisting communist aggression. The doctrine was intended to check increased Soviet influence in the Middle East, which had resulted from the supply of arms to Egypt by communist countries as well as from strong communist support of Arab states against an Israeli, French, and British attack on Egypt in October 1956. Eisenhower proclaimed, with the approval of Congress, that he would use the armed forces to protect the independence of any Middle Eastern country seeking American help. The Eisenhower Doctrine represented no radical change in U.S. policy; the Truman Doctrine had pledged similar support to Greece and Turkey 10 years earlier. It was a continuation of the U.S. policy of containment of or resistance to any extension of the Soviet sphere of influence.
Excerpt from The Eisenhower Doctrine on the Middle East,
A Message to Congress, January 5, 1957
The Middle East has abruptly reached a new and critical stage in its long and important history. …Our country supports without reservation the full sovereignty and independence of each and every nation of the Middle East.
…(J)ust recently there have been hostilities involving Western European nations that once exercised much influence in the area. Also the relatively large attack by Israel in October has intensified the basic differences between (Israel) and its Arab neighbors. All this instability has been heightened and, at times, manipulated by International Communism.
Russia’s rulers have long sought to dominate the Middle East. That was true of the Czars and it is true of the Bolsheviks.
The Soviet Union has nothing whatsoever to fear from the United States in the Middle East, or anywhere else in the world, so long as its rulers do not themselves first resort to aggression.
The reason for Russia’s interest in the Middle East is solely that of power politics. Considering her announced purpose of Communizing the world, it is easy to understand her hope of dominating the Middle East. . . .