{"id":{"repo_id":"vt","oai_identifier":"oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/47948"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/vt/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/47948","repository":{"repo_id":"vt","name":"Virginia Tech","base_url":"https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"U.S. in the Unipolar Moment: Analysis of George W. Bush Middle East Foreign Policy","abstract":"Using a comparative trend analysis for fifteen states in the Middle East during President George W. Bush's eight year administration, this paper provides one method for answering the research question, \"What was the priority/focus of U.S. Middle East policy during the W. Bush Administration?\" Within the context of international relations theories neorealism, neoliberalism, and neoconservatism, U.S. policy is broken down into three policy priorities: stability, security, and democracy promotion and measured for each state for each year of the administration. Line graphs illustrate the changes from year to year and linear trend lines indicate the direction of change as positive, negative, or neutral. The results are used to validate the three working hypotheses: 1) if the U.S. views stability as paramount, then its foreign policy will be to support the status quo regimes, 2) if the U.S. wants to maintain security, then its foreign policy will be to demonstrate power projection via its military, and 3) if the U.S. aims at democracy promotion, the its foreign policy will be to implement economic aid and assistance programs to reform non-democratic governments and strengthen existing democratic institutions. Eleven states confirmed the stability hypothesis, nine states confirmed the security hypothesis, and twelve states confirmed the democracy promotion hypothesis. There was no discernable pattern between the trends across states indicating that the U.S. consistently pursued one policy priority over the others. There were only two complete cases in which a state had only one positive trending policy priority.","abstract_html":"Using a comparative trend analysis for fifteen states in the Middle East during President George W. Bush's eight year administration, this paper provides one method for answering the research question, "What was the priority/focus of U.S. Middle East policy during the W. Bush Administration?" Within the context of international relations theories neorealism, neoliberalism, and neoconservatism, U.S. policy is broken down into three policy priorities: stability, security, and democracy promotion and measured for each state for each year of the administration. Line graphs illustrate the changes from year to year and linear trend lines indicate the direction of change as positive, negative, or neutral. The results are used to validate the three working hypotheses: 1) if the U.S. views stability as paramount, then its foreign policy will be to support the status quo regimes, 2) if the U.S. wants to maintain security, then its foreign policy will be to demonstrate power projection via its military, and 3) if the U.S. aims at democracy promotion, the its foreign policy will be to implement economic aid and assistance programs to reform non-democratic governments and strengthen existing democratic institutions. Eleven states confirmed the stability hypothesis, nine states confirmed the security hypothesis, and twelve states confirmed the democracy promotion hypothesis. There was no discernable pattern between the trends across states indicating that the U.S. consistently pursued one policy priority over the others. There were only two complete cases in which a state had only one positive trending policy priority.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Gordon, Mark Alexander"],"institution":"Virginia Tech","degree_name":"Master of Arts","degree_level":"masters","degree_discipline":"Political Science","degree_department":"Political Science","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":["Pourchot, Georgeta V.","Stivachtis, Yannis A."],"committee_members":["Zanotti, Laura"],"year":2014,"date_issued":"2014-05-09","date_published":"2014-05-09","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:35Z","subjects":["Middle East","US Foreign Policy","Neoconservatism","Hegemony","Democracy Promotion"],"languages":[],"rights":["In Copyright"],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["vt_gsexam:2998"],"render_values":[{"text":"vt_gsexam:2998","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/10919/47948","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.committeechair","label":"Committee Chair","values":["Pourchot, Georgeta V.","Stivachtis, Yannis A."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.committeemember","label":"Committee Member","values":["Zanotti, Laura"]},{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Political Science"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Gordon, Mark Alexander"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2014-05-10T08:00:11Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2014-05-10T08:00:11Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2014-05-09"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Virginia Tech"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Political Science"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["masters"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Middle East","US Foreign Policy","Neoconservatism","Hegemony","Democracy Promotion"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["In Copyright"]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["vt_gsexam:2998"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/47948"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Using a comparative trend analysis for fifteen states in the Middle East during President George W. Bush's eight year administration, this paper provides one method for answering the research question, \"What was the priority/focus of U.S. Middle East policy during the W. Bush Administration?\" Within the context of international relations theories neorealism, neoliberalism, and neoconservatism, U.S. policy is broken down into three policy priorities: stability, security, and democracy promotion and measured for each state for each year of the administration. Line graphs illustrate the changes from year to year and linear trend lines indicate the direction of change as positive, negative, or neutral. The results are used to validate the three working hypotheses: 1) if the U.S. views stability as paramount, then its foreign policy will be to support the status quo regimes, 2) if the U.S. wants to maintain security, then its foreign policy will be to demonstrate power projection via its military, and 3) if the U.S. aims at democracy promotion, the its foreign policy will be to implement economic aid and assistance programs to reform non-democratic governments and strengthen existing democratic institutions. Eleven states confirmed the stability hypothesis, nine states confirmed the security hypothesis, and twelve states confirmed the democracy promotion hypothesis. There was no discernable pattern between the trends across states indicating that the U.S. consistently pursued one policy priority over the others. There were only two complete cases in which a state had only one positive trending policy priority."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["Master of Arts"]},{"key":"dc:format.medium","label":"Dc Format Medium","values":["ETD"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["U.S. in the Unipolar Moment: Analysis of George W. Bush Middle East Foreign Policy"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.committeechair":["Pourchot, Georgeta V.","Stivachtis, Yannis A."],"dc:contributor.committeemember":["Zanotti, Laura"],"dc:contributor.department":["Political Science"],"dc:creator":["Gordon, Mark Alexander"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2014-05-10T08:00:11Z"],"dc:date.available":["2014-05-10T08:00:11Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2014-05-09"],"dc:description.abstract":["Using a comparative trend analysis for fifteen states in the Middle East during President George W. Bush's eight year administration, this paper provides one method for answering the research question, \"What was the priority/focus of U.S. Middle East policy during the W. Bush Administration?\" Within the context of international relations theories neorealism, neoliberalism, and neoconservatism, U.S. policy is broken down into three policy priorities: stability, security, and democracy promotion and measured for each state for each year of the administration. Line graphs illustrate the changes from year to year and linear trend lines indicate the direction of change as positive, negative, or neutral. The results are used to validate the three working hypotheses: 1) if the U.S. views stability as paramount, then its foreign policy will be to support the status quo regimes, 2) if the U.S. wants to maintain security, then its foreign policy will be to demonstrate power projection via its military, and 3) if the U.S. aims at democracy promotion, the its foreign policy will be to implement economic aid and assistance programs to reform non-democratic governments and strengthen existing democratic institutions. Eleven states confirmed the stability hypothesis, nine states confirmed the security hypothesis, and twelve states confirmed the democracy promotion hypothesis. There was no discernable pattern between the trends across states indicating that the U.S. consistently pursued one policy priority over the others. There were only two complete cases in which a state had only one positive trending policy priority."],"dc:description.degree":["Master of Arts"],"dc:format.medium":["ETD"],"dc:identifier.other":["vt_gsexam:2998"],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/47948"],"dc:publisher":["Virginia Tech"],"dc:rights":["In Copyright"],"dc:rights.uri":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:subject":["Middle East","US Foreign Policy","Neoconservatism","Hegemony","Democracy Promotion"],"dc:title":["U.S. in the Unipolar Moment: Analysis of George W. Bush Middle East Foreign Policy"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Political Science"],"thesis:degree_level":["masters"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts"],"thesis:institution_name":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:35Z"}