Gerald Ford: Cold War Policy:
August 9, 1974 – January 20, 1977
What were the goals of US foreign policy during the Ford years?
How successful were Ford’s policies?
Students will be able to
1. Compare the policies of Gerald Ford toward the Soviet Union
2. Discuss changing US foreign policy in the developing world
3. Identify the success and failures of Ford’s foreign policy in the Middle East
Why it Matters:
The ordeal of Vietnam led many to question the direction of American foreign policy. They asked: Was the United States so concerned with fighting communism that it ended up supporting oppressive anticommunist governments? Should the United States continue to pursue détente with the Soviets? Or should it instead demand that the Soviet Government grant its people more freedoms? The echoes of these debates continue to be heard today
FORD CONTINUES NIXON’S FOREIGN POLICIES
Relations with the Soviet Union remained central to US foreign policy during the Ford and Carter Administrations. Upon assuming the Presidency, Gerald Ford made clear that his foreign policy would differ little from that of Richard Nixon’s. Ford retained Henry Kissinger as his Secretary of State and continued to pursue détente with the Soviet Union and China.
Ford and Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev met in late 1974 and again the next year when the two leaders endorsed the Helsinki Accords. This document put the nation of Europe on record in favor of human rights, or the basic rights automatically held by every human being. Some thought that President Ford would try to compel the Soviet Union to allow more political freedoms, but Ford decided to put arms control ahead of human rights. At his direction, the United States continued disarmament talks with the Soviets. These talks led to an agreement known as SALT II, in which the two nations pledged to limit nuclear arms production
Trouble in Southeast Asia
Under Ford, the United States sought to put the turmoil of the Vietnam War behind it. When the communist Khmer Rouge government of Cambodia became a genocidal slaughter of civilians, killing about 1.5 million people between 1975 and 1979, the United States did not intervene. The main exception to this policy of noninvolvement came in May 1975, when the Khmer Rouge seized an American merchant ship, the Mayaguez, which had been steaming just outside Cambodian waters, Ford responded by sending in some United States Marines who freed the ship.
During Ford’s Presidency, South Vietnam fell to North Vietnam. As the communists took over, hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese, many of whom had worked with the United States tried to escape. Many refugees took to the seas is rickety unseaworthy boats. These Boat People represented the largest mass migration of humanity by sea in modern history. Over a 20-year period, more than one million men, women, and children braved storms, pirates, and starvation in search of refuge abroad. Their immediate destinations were in other nations of Southeast Asia, but many eventually found that refuge in the United States and Canada.
How did Ford approach foreign policy challenges during his presidency?
Read the Book the Little Refugee Anh Do and Suzanne Do and complete the worksheet below- or listen to the book via this website: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4z0O8Q40skI
1. How many people lived in Anh Do’s childhood home in Vietnam?
2. Why did he and his family leave Vietnam?
3. How did they escape?
4. Who did they meet on the high seas?
5. What is Anh Do’s brother’s name?
6. Who rescued them?
7. What strange clothes did Anh’s baby brother wear when he first arrived?
8. What sort of business did his parents establish in Australia?
9. Who was the red headed boy Anh befriended at the beginning of Grade 3 at school?
10. What announcement did the principal make about Anh at the prize giving ceremony at school?
US Immigration Policy:
Should We Grant Amnesty to Illegal Immigrants?
Background of the Issue:
Amnesty for illegal Immigrants.
Many immigrants have crossed the US border illegally to find work. Some Americans believe that they should be granted amnesty, or pardon, to allow them to stay here legally. Critics say this would encourage more illegal immigration
The first major effort to limit immigration to the United States came in the late 1800s. By then, immigrants were streaming into the country. Many Americans worries about using their jobs or their sense of national identity. Since then, immigration and immigration policy have remained controversial issues. Use the timeline below to explore this enduring issue and answer the essential question “Should We Grant Amnesty to Illegal Immigrants?”
The Debate Issue:
Should We Grant Amnesty to Illegal Immigrants?
1. Compare- Why does Munoz support amnesty for illegal immigrants? Why does Erier oppose it?
2. Analyze- How do the issues debated above differ from the issues that led to the passage of the National Origins Act?
3. Debate- Learn more about recent debates on immigration and prepare ab argument supporting one viewpoint
Name: Date: Period:
The 1947-1948 Israeli-Arab war resulted in the creation of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees. Many ended up in camps in the West Bank and Gaza Strip as well as in Jordan and elsewhere. These camps still exist. Though many of the original refugees have died, a good number are still alive. Children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren are now part of the refugee population.
To Palestinians, a just settlement of the refugee issue is a key element in any peace agreement with Israel. Israelis, however, view it as one the Arab nations and the Palestinians created when they rejected the 1947 United Nations partition plan. For both sides the refugee issue continues to be a very emotional one.
Directions: You are a historian. Read the following excerpts from varying points of view about the origins of the Palestinian refugee problem. Then imagine you are writing a history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Your sources are what appear in these excerpts. You have just one well-developed paragraph to explain why there is a Palestinian refugee problem.
1. The Arab refugee problem was caused by a war of aggression, launched by the Arab States against Israel in 1947 and 1948. Let there be no mistake. If there had been no war against Israel, with its consequent harvest of bloodshed, misery, panic and flight, there would be no problem of Arab refugees today. Once you determine the responsibility for that war, you have determined the responsibility for the refugee problem....The historic origins of that conflict are clearly defined by the confessions of the Arab governments themselves: "This will be a war of extermination," declared the Secretary General of the Arab League, speaking for the governments of six Arab States: "It will be a momentous massacre to be spoken of like the Mongolian massacre and the Crusades."
--Abba Eban, Chief Israeli representative to the United Nations
2. Immediately after the UN General Assembly passed the partition resolution on November 29, 1947, serious clashes broke out between the Arab and Jewish communities in Palestine....some 30,000 upper- and middle-class Arabs left Palestine for safer areas....As the fighting spread and intensified, many more thousands of frightened Arabs fled their homes to escape areas of combat....After April 1, 1948, the Arab exodus accelerated as a result of several successful Jewish military offensives into Arab-inhabited territories and terroristic attacks by the Irgun and the Stern Gang (two Jewish guerilla groups) against Arab civilians, like the massacre of 250 men, women, and children in the village of Deir Yaseen, to spread panic among the Arabs and to cause them to flee whenever Jewish forces approached.... After May 15, many Arabs in combat areas fled their villages. Israelis claimed that their leaders had ordered them to leave until they could return with the victorious Arab armies. The Arabs denied this.
(Later) the Israeli authorities used both military force and psychological warfare to compel as many Arabs as possible to leave their homes because this would: (l) lessen the danger of Arab espionage and threats to Israeli lines of communication; (2) provide desperately needed land and buildings for the Jewish immigrants pouring in; (3) weaken the neighboring Arab states and interfere with their military efforts by forcing them to cope with a vast and unexpected refugee problem....and (4) give Israel a "trump card" which could be used in future political bargaining.
--Fred J. Khouri, The Arab-Israeli Dilemma
3. The official myth, widely believed in by Israeli Jews, has it that the 700,000 Arabs who fled their farms and villages and cities, most of them then barred by Israel from returning, did so only for two reasons: They left willingly, not wishing to live in a Jewish state, and they were ordered out by the commanders of the Arab Legion, who anticipated a decisive military campaign that would return the Arab residents over the ruins to a defeated Israel. In short, the Jews had no responsibility whatever for the flight of the Arabs. The truth of this is only partial....Arab residents of the new state of Israel ran for a mixture of reasons. Some were simply running from the fighting, as in any war. Others have told me that they heard the Arab Legion's broadcasts telling them to leave and took heed....Some who were wealthy enough to afford a trip to Beirut or Amman went for what they believed would be only a few weeks....But others were deliberately and forcibly expelled by the Jews. And others fled because they were convinced that if the Jews got into their villages, they would massacre men, women, and children as they had done in the Arab village of Deir Yassin in April l948.... --David K. Shipler, Arab and Jew: Wounded Spirits in a Promised Land
4. It was the Arab states, not Israel, that rejected the United Nations partition of Palestine into two states, one Arab, one Jewish. It was five Arab countries that invaded Israel upon its independence. Thousands of Palestinians fled the fighting-some left simply because of the ravages of war; others hoped to avoid the conflict and return once the Arab states defeated and occupied the new Jewish state; still others were expelled in some locations. While it is a legitimate historical task to identify these cases, it is clear that had the Arabs not gone to war with Israel there would be no refugee problem. The basic facts of Israel's creation are such that every Israeli and others have every reason to be proud. --Abraham Foxman, National Director, Anti-Defamation League