On September 2, 1901, Theodore Roosevelt, the vice president of the US, highlighted his ideal foreign policy in a speech at the Minnesota State Fair. During his speech, he famously stated his favorite phrase “Speak softly and carry a big stick”. After two weeks, he became the president of the United States and the policy known as “Big Stick Diplomacy” defined his leadership and approach to international relations. The main principle of the policy was to use diplomacy and negotiation (Speak softly) as a first resort and supported by the implicit threat of military force (Big Stick).
What is Big Stick Diplomacy?
Big stick diplomacy, also known as big stick policy, is a foreign policy approach that emphasizes diplomatic negotiation and military power if necessary to ensure that the national interest of the state is protected and the country’s global influence is asserted. The political strategy gained prominence during the early 20th century.
Big Stick Diplomacy is a term which is associated with US President Theodore Roosevelt. On September 2, 1901, Roosevelt delivered a speech at the Minnesota State Fair highlighting the famous phrase ‘Speak softly and carry a big stick’. This phrase defined his foreign policy and reflected Roosevelt’s belief that while diplomacy was always the priority, it was also necessary to have strong military power to ensure the nation’s national security and international influence. The approach is closely linked to events like the Spanish-American War and the expansion of American influence on the global stage.
Origin of Big Stick Diplomacy
The policy emerged after the Spanish-American war in 1898, a conflict that demonstrated America’s military power and marked the country’s emergence as an imperial power. The United States experienced significant growth and expansion, both territorially and economically. As it became a major power, it started focusing primarily on protecting its national interest and asserting its influence in world affairs.
This is an African phrase that became the principle of Roosevelt’s foreign policy. The Big Stick policy was influenced by the earlier U.S. doctrine, particularly the Monroe Doctrine which sought to limit the European powers from interfering in the affairs of America.
Key Principles of Big Stick Diplomacy
The key principles of Big Stick Policy shape the US approach to international affairs. These principles highlight the importance of diplomacy, negotiation, the use of military power as deterrence, and the projection of power. The principles of big stick diplomacy are:
1) Diplomacy and Negotiation as the First Resort
One of the key principles of Big Stick Diplomacy is Roosevelt’s belief that diplomatic and peaceful negotiation should be the primary means to protect national interests and resolve conflicts. He believed that military force should be the last resort if negotiation fails to resolve the conflict. Before taking any military action, he made sure that all channels for diplomacy and dialogue were explored exhaustively. His diplomatic efforts involved mediation, peacekeeping, negotiating treaties, and trade.
2) The Deterrence Factor
Another core principle of the big stick policy is deterrence which emphasizes the idea that visibly showing military power can discourage potential threats before they arise. Roosevelt believed that diplomacy was more effective if it was supported by a strong military. He emphasized that by maintaining strong military power, a nation can prevent adversaries from challenging its interests and it will also help to maintain peace and stability in international affairs. The deterrence factor involved Roosevelt’s focus on military interventions and the expansion of a strong US navy.
3) Strategic Intervention in the Western Hemisphere
A key principle of big stick diplomacy was Roosevelt’s belief that the United States must maintain stability in the region and prevent European powers from reasserting control over the former colonies or getting involved in military conflicts within Latin American countries. So, he was willing to intervene in the foreign affairs.
The Monroe Doctrine was a policy that warned European powers to stay out of the Western hemisphere and refrain from further colonization and intervention in the West. Roosevelt’s ‘Roosevelt Corollary’ extended the Monroe Doctrine, by claiming that the United States had the right to intervene in the affairs of Latin American countries to make sure that they do not fall into disorder. The Platt Amendment and Cuba is an example of this principle.
Significance of Big Stick Diplomacy
The assertive and proactive approach of big stick diplomacy has significantly influenced how countries project power strategies in the contemporary era. Its principles served as a foundation for the nations that seek to assert their influence on the global stage.
Military modernization and projection of power are one of the areas where big stick policy continues to influence modern strategies. In the contemporary era, nations understand and recognize the importance of building a strong military power and maintaining its presence to assert their influence and safeguard their national interests. The focus and investment of nations in advanced weaponry, air force capabilities, and naval fleets reflect the Big Stick policy’s influence on military power.
The focus of the big stick policy on the projection of power is still seen today in the strategic position of the military and the base agreements. Nations place their troops in key regions around the world to reflect their readiness and commitment to safeguard their interests.
Examples of Big Stick Diplomacy
There are a few examples where Big Stick policy was used to project the global power of the US and to ensure the influence of America.
1) Panama Canal
One of the most notable applications of big stick diplomacy was the construction of the Panama Canal. Under the leadership of Roosevelt, the United States significantly supported the independence of Panama from Colombia in 1903, ultimately securing the construction of the Panama Canal. This project demonstrated the power of America and its influence while also opening critical trade routes, facilitating global commerce, and enhancing the geopolitical significance of the nation.
2) Great White Fleet
The great white fleet served as a powerful reflection of American power. Roosevelt sent a fleet of 16 battleships on a world tour from 1907 to 1909 to project the growing military capability of America and to reinforce diplomatic relations. This fleet tour reflected Roosevelt’s use of military power to support diplomatic efforts and to deter any potential threats to American interests.
3) The Russo-Japanese War Mediation
Another significant application of big stick diplomacy was Roosevelt’s mediation of the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905). He mediated peace between Russia and Japan through his diplomatic efforts which earned him the Nobel Peace Prize in 1906. He brokered a peace treaty which is known as the “Treaty of Portsmouth” between the two states that ended the conflict. This successful mediation demonstrated the effectiveness of diplomatic intervention and established the US as a global peace broker.
Criticism Of Big Stick Diplomacy
While big stick diplomacy gained success in establishing the United States as a global power, it also faced several criticisms:
1) Imperialism
One of the most significant criticisms of Big Stick Diplomacy is due to its imperialistic nature, particularly due to the US interference in the internal affairs of smaller nations without their approval and consent. Many critics argued that it demonstrated a paternalistic attitude of the United States towards Latin America, where the US acted as a self-appointed guardian of Latin America which further created a perception of American Imperialism.
2) Unequal Power Dynamics
Critics have also argued that the big stick policy resulted in unequal power dynamics between the United States and Latin America. This imbalance of power further resulted in resentment and distrust toward the US, especially in Latin American countries that felt they were being treated as subordinate to US power.
3) Militarization of the Foreign Policy
One of the main criticisms of big stick diplomacy is that Roosevelt was seen as focusing more on the military force than the diplomatic negotiations. Critics argued that this approach increases the risks of potential conflicts while undermining diplomatic efforts and peaceful negotiation.
Conclusion
Big stick diplomacy involves the utilization of diplomatic negotiation as well as the use of military force to safeguard the national interest and to assert the US influence on the world stage. The policy gained prominence during the 20th century and it has left a lasting impact on the US foreign policies.
Although the legacy of big stick diplomacy is controversial with the criticism of its imperialistic nature, it continues to shape global diplomacy and influence future foreign policy strategy. The most prominent examples of big stick diplomacy include the Panama Canal, brokering peace between Japan and Russia that ended the war, and the deployment of the Great White Fleet.
FAQs
Why Is It called “Big Stick” Diplomacy?
The term “Big Stick” origins back to Roosevelt’s famous saying ‘Speak soft and carry a big stick”. The term refers to military strength and the ‘speak softly’ emphasizes the importance of peaceful negotiation and diplomacy.
Was the Big Stick Policy Successful?
The policy was successful in many areas, particularly in establishing the influence of the United States in the Western Hemisphere and expanding its influence globally.
How Did the Big Stick Policy Impact the US Foreign Policies?
The big stick policy had a long-lasting effect on the later US foreign policies, particularly in terms of military modernization, military interventionism, and the projection of power to safeguard the national interests.
What Factor Does the Big Stick Policy Depend on?
The big stick policy depends on strong military power, diplomatic efforts, and peaceful negotiation.
When Was the Big Stick Policy Used?
Big stick policy was primarily used during the leadership of Roosevelt. It was applied during various affairs of foreign policy, particularly in Latin America and the Caribbean.
