The formation of American exceptional identities: A three-tier model of the “standard of civilization” in US foreign policy
| DOI | 10.1177/1354066114562475 |
| Author | Taesuh Cha |
| Published date | 01 December 2015 |
| Date | 01 December 2015 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
European Journal of
International Relations
2015, Vol. 21(4) 743 –767
© The Author(s) 2015
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1354066114562475
ejt.sagepub.com
E
JR
I
The formation of American
exceptional identities: A
three-tier model of the
“standard of civilization”
in US foreign policy
Taesuh Cha
Johns Hopkins University, USA
Abstract
The dominant structuralist/materialist schema in International Relations accords little
importance to the domestic ideational base of the state in its concern to explain the
pattern of foreign policy. In contrast, my article, following the tenets of unit-level
constructivism, asks how American identity was formed, contested, and manifested
through its interaction with two significant others — the European empires and the
Native Americans — in the USA’s formative era in order to understand the origins of
American liberal internationalism and popular imperialism. I argue that the US identity
was constituted in two different ways: as a transformative state against the Westphalian
system and as a civilizing force over “barbarian” natives. The two main US foreign
policy orientations — the Jeffersonian tradition and the Jacksonian tradition — were
produced by these ambivalent American selves. In this context, a hierarchical, tripartite
model of the “standard of civilization” in the American security imaginary emerged at
the turn of the 19th century: the USA at the top as a revolutionary vanguard in human
history; European international society, which should be negotiated and reformed in
America’s own image later, in the middle; and the “Rest” at the bottom, which need to
be removed or assimilated.
Keywords
Constructivism, discourse, English School, foreign policy, identity, international history
Corresponding author:
Taesuh Cha, PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 N. Charles
Street, 338 Mergenthaler Hall, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.
Email: taesuhcha@gmail.com
562475EJT0010.1177/1354066114562475European Journal of International RelationsCha
research-article2014
Article
744 European Journal of International Relations 21(4)
Introduction
This article asks how American exceptional identities were formed, contested, and mani-
fested through their interaction with two significant Others — the European empires and
the Native Americans — in the USA’s formative era (circa 1754/56~1823/31). I argue
that the US identity, informed by its European discursive heritage — republicanism,
Christianity, and the Enlightenment — was constituted in two different ways: as a trans-
formative state against the Westphalian system and as a civilizing force over “barbarian”
natives. The two main US foreign policy orientations or contending conceptualizations
of the national interest with American characteristics — the Madisonian/Jeffersonian
tradition (the origin of liberal internationalism) and the Jacksonian tradition (the origin
of popular imperialism) — were produced by these ambivalent American selves.
In this context, a hierarchical, tripartite model of the “standard of civilization” in
American foreign policy emerged at the turn of the 19th century. First, it defines the
nature of the international system, as well as the place of the nation in the world. Second,
it produces a particular American attitude toward the outside: the US at the top as a revo-
lutionary vanguard in human history; European international society, which should be
negotiated and reformed in America’s own image later, in the middle; and at the bottom,
the “Rest,” non-white Others that need to be removed or assimilated.
My study aims to offer an alternative hypothesis on US foreign policy by constructing
a causal/constitutive mechanism between American exceptional identities, interests, and
practices. It is a competing argument against the conventional structuralist/materialist
understanding of US diplomacy in that America’s foreign behaviors will be illustrated as
the outcome of its socially constructed identities and not as the logical products of an
anarchic international structure. Furthermore, the examination of the multiple, contested
American identities and, consequently, their contending foreign policy traditions will
offer a new outlook on a variety of important historical junctures in American foreign
affairs. Through the prism of identity–interest–policy contestations and mixtures, the
USA’s contradictory, differentiated attitudes towards the West and the “Rest” will be
explained. That is, America’s non-liberal approach to the non-European world, as
opposed to its liberal internationalist posture to the Atlantic world, would be understood
not as a simple aberration or blunder, but as a tragedy that is related to its fundamental
racist/militarist identity based on its own expansionist experiences.
The theoretical framework: The politics of identity/
difference in early-modern America
The reason I focus on the national identity variable is that it is a critical link mediating
interstate structure and state interest/policy in the social sphere (Jepperson et al., 1996:
59). This approach is in direct opposition to the conventional understanding of state
behavior in International Relations (IR). Regarding American diplomacy in particular,
the mainstream structuralist and materialist schema has accorded little importance to the
domestic and ideational base of the US in explaining the pattern of its foreign policy.
Indeed, revolutionary states that “have plans totally to reorder world affairs in a way
incommensurate with their ‘objective’ capacities” are ignored as “irrational” actors that
To continue reading
Request your trial