This course examines the causes and consequences of American foreign policy since 1898. Course readings cover both substantive and methods topics. Four substantive topics are covered:

major theories of American foreign policy;
major episodes in the history of American foreign policy and historical/interpretive controversies about them;
the evaluation of major past American foreign policies–were their results good or bad? and
current policy controversies, including means of evaluating proposed policies.

Three methods topics are covered:

basic social scientific inference–what are theories? what are good theories? how should theories be framed and tested?
historical investigative methodology, including archival research, and, most importantly,
case study methodology.

Historical episodes covered in the course are used as raw material for case studies, asking “if these episodes were the subject of case studies, how should those studies be performed, and what could be learned from them?”

These primary source excerpts are broken into 2 groups: Cuban perspectives and American perspectives of the Bay of Pigs invasion. Consider having students work in pairs or small groups to read, discussion and answer the questions for their perspective. Then have students from both perspectives share observations. Consider using a guided question such as "Why are views so different for the same event, especially of those who fought at the Bay of Pigs?"

This set of primary source documents is compiled as a DBQ (document based question) assignment. DBQs are used in all AP history courses to get students to group and analyze documents and authors' points of view into an essay. Students should be able to use the provided documents and prompt to group similar documents together and then write a 5 paragraph essay.

On April 30, 1975, the South Vietnamese capital of Saigon fell to the North Vietnamese Army, effectively ending the Vietnam War. In the days before, U.S. forces evacuated thousands of Americans and South Vietnamese. American diplomats were on the frontlines, organizing what would be the most ambitious helicopter evacuation in history.

The logistics of issuing visas and evacuating these Vietnamese and American citizens were not glamorous but were essential. American diplomats were behind every detail. Some diplomats showed exceptional bravery saving Vietnamese citizens who would have faced persecution under the new regime.

These artifacts and photos in our collection offer a glimpse of what diplomats and refugees experienced during the Fall of Saigon. More broadly, they show the challenging and dangerous circumstances diplomats may encounter while performing their work.

For almost 300 years, leaders of the North African Barbary States hired ship captains to capture foreign ships in the Mediterranean Sea and Atlantic Ocean.

These captains, known as corsairs, kept the ships and cargo, then ransomed the crew or forced them to work in captivity.

This practice was a way for these semi-independent states of the Ottoman Empire to generate money. Some wealthy countries, such as Great Britain, would sign treaties with or make payments to the Barbary States, permitting their merchants to travel the seas freely. These cash payments and preferential trade agreements were called tributes.

When the United States gained its independence in 1783, it lost the protection of the British navy, and Barbary corsairs captured two American ships in 1785. As a new nation with limited revenue to support its government, the United States had limited funds to pay tribute and many Americans opposed it on principle. In 1793, Algerine corsairs captured 11 more American ships and 100 citizens, prompting a commercial and humanitarian crisis that could not be ignored.

With no navy or substantial annual revenue, how could the United States pay hefty ransom fees and prevent this from happening again?

Would the Barbary States even agree to negotiate terms when they clearly had the upper hand?

By the 1830s, independence movements reduced Spain’s colonies to Cuba and Puerto Rico in the Caribbean, the Philippines, and several smaller islands in the western Pacific Ocean including Guam, the Marianas, and the Marshall Islands.

At the same time, the United States was increasing its global diplomatic presence and economic power, warning European countries throughout the 19th century from attempting to recolonize countries in the Western Hemisphere.

Meanwhile, the American public read newspaper reports of severe Spanish treatment of revolutionaries in Cuba and the Philippines. Many in the United States wanted to go to war against Spain because of these atrocities, and others wanted to use it as an excuse to expand America’s territory. Some wanted to help Cuba become a free and independent country while some wanted the United States to replace Spain and take control over Cuba, as well as the Philippines, to increase its global military and economic power. All could agree that America’s commercial investments in the regions must be protected.

The United States sent the USS Maine battleship to Havana Harbor to protect its citizens and interests in the Spanish-Cuban conflict. On the night of February 15, 1898, an explosion rocked the ship which eventually sank, killing 266 sailors.

While unclear if this was an attack or accident, the press in the United States blamed Spain immediately, and war between the United States and Spain seemed inevitable.

Could the Spanish keep a stronghold on their last colonies or will the Cuban and Filipino people gain independence?

The Suez Canal was completed in 1869 to connect the Mediterranean and Red Seas, creating an essential waterway for global trade, as ships no longer had to navigate around the Horn of Africa.

At the time it opened, the canal was 164 kilometers, or roughly 100 miles, long. Without the canal, the circumnavigation around Africa is 9,654 kilometers or 6,000 miles. For most of its existence, the canal was managed by the Suez Canal Company which was owned by Great Britain and France.

On July 26, 1956, Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nassar nationalized the canal, intending to take control of the canal’s operation and its revenue.

The world was still recovering from World War II with new national border conflicts and the onset of the Cold War. Many nations depended on the Suez Canal, especially Great Britain and France.

How would they manage their economic and political interests while avoiding conflict?

How would the United States and the Soviet Union support Nassar’s quest for Egypt’s sovereignty and Israel?

How would Great Britain, France, the United States, Israel, and the Soviet Union manage their own economic and political interests while avoiding military conflict?

How would Egypt preserve its national sovereignty?

In this historical scenario, students will have to overcome differing national interests to maintain global security and peace. The exercise will develop skills in leadership, collaboration, composure, analysis, communication, awareness, management, innovation, and advocacy.

In this webinar, sponsored by the Fellowship of Reconciliation's Militarism Research Project, researchers Lora Lumpe and Adam Isaacson talking about using the Freedom of Information Act to pry loose information on U.S. military aid to foreign countries. Webinar is hosted by John Lindsay Poland, an FOR staff researcher w/ extensive experience in Latin America.