2 Comments
Sep 2·edited Oct 3Liked by Travis Monteleone

It is my understanding that President Theodore Roosevelt had a pragmatic, real-politik approach to American foreign policy, as opposed to his rival Wilson’s idealistic approach. This included Roosevelt’s “Big Stick” policy in Latin America and a willingness to assert American belligerence and muscle on the broader global stage, such as securing the Panama Canal Zone, sending the Great White Fleet on its world tour, and support for the Spanish-American War under his predecessor President McKinley. However, I wouldn’t characterize his realist approach to foreign policy as Kennanism, as he lived in a multi-polar world with several great powers — and he didn’t see American policy as directed against just one of them. Nor do I see his policy as fitting into the other three categories you mentioned (and is opposite to Wilson’s approach).

So do you think Roosevelt’s approach should be a separate category? Or just a subset of Kennanism, based on the argument that Roosevelt’s policy would have been easily adopted to a Kennan approach had he lived in a bi-polar, Cold War type of world?

Expand full comment
author

Great point. I think parts of Roosevelt's foreign policy had Hamiltonian flairs, specifically his focus on building a strong navy and his realist approach to foreign relations. While some of his decisions were driven by economic interests, many were driven by more nakedly nationalist interests, so I agree his foreign policy doesn't fit squarely into any one bucket. I definitely don't think it was a Kennanian approach given the multi polar world you mentioned. Perhaps its a subset of Hamiltonian or maybe it warrants its own fifth bucket.

Expand full comment