Need an argumentative essay on Foreign Relations. Needs to be 4 pages. Please no plagiarism.Download file to see previous pages... The September 2001 terrorist attack in the United States motivated th

Need an argumentative essay on Foreign Relations. Needs to be 4 pages. Please no plagiarism.

The September 2001 terrorist attack in the United States motivated the formulation of new strategies. Such strategies moved the United States to attack Iraq, drawing support from its European allies. Louise Fawcett and Raymond Hinnebusch are two of the analysts who have sought to define how the Iraq war redefined the global political arena and the positions held by certain states in the global society. Evidently, the war caused a shift in the understanding of foreign relations trends. However, these two analysts express competing perspectives on the shift on the global foreign relations. This paper will address the competing perspectives. Hinnebusch considers the effects of the Iraq war, stating that the smaller states were under a surging threat as a consequence of the war. After the September 2001 attack, the United States heightened its surveillance and vigilance system. Such heightened systems provided a timely expose that Iraq had become a growing hub of nuclear weapons that challenged global security. The United States made the move to wage war against Iraq, in a bid to destabilize it, and eliminate the threat it was posing to the global societal welfare. Evidently, political and security trends are some of the critical issues that determine the direction taken by social agendas. As expected, the United States received support from Europe, specifically from closest ally in the region, United Kingdom. According to Hinnebusch, such support served as a restraint for the emergence of some form of constraints to the development of the war in 2003. In his argument, he makes it evident that the United States was a hegemony that made all the critical decisions determining the direction of the war (Hinnebusch 453). After the attack, Bush sets new strategies that would define the war on terror. The evident position of America on a global front compels it to prove highly decisive in sensitive issues such as the emerging terror. America decided that it would engage the Iraq because of the threat it posed. Hinnebusch argues that all the other states only had to choose their stand depending on their relationship with the United States and the Middle East. The United Kingdom and japan exploited the opportunity to their advantage, a factor that altered the trends taken by foreign relations between these countries and the United States. However, smaller states had limited choice because they faced the greatest threat. The war affected numerous sectors of the global business front that in turn affected societies directly. The United States pursued personal interests, especially those tailored to promote its hegemony in the global economy. According to this critic, some countries defied the opinion expressed by their publics and confirmed their support for the united states because of the perceived benefits (Hinnebusch 457). The author describes how the hegemony stability order defines the strategies used by America to continue prevailing unconditionally. He further describes the global empire that America creates, that would serve to disadvantage the third world states because of the pressure it exerts on global economic and political scenarios. On the other hand, Fawcett explores the same issue, shedding new light on the effects of the Iraq war. According to him, may of the objectives of the war as never materialized despite the perception of the United States (Fawcett 328).