khakisofirvington.com – Warren G. Harding’s presidency, lasting from 1921 to 1923, was marked by many defining characteristics: a promise to return to normalcy, an embrace of conservative domestic policies, and a foreign policy that sought to retreat from the international entanglements that had characterized the early 20th century. The end of World War I left the United States grappling with its role in the global order, and Harding’s administration is often viewed as a pivotal moment in the country’s shift away from the active internationalism seen during the war and the Wilsonian idealism of President Woodrow Wilson. Harding’s approach to foreign policy was not only a reflection of his personal beliefs but also a response to the public’s desire for stability and the recovery from wartime trauma.
Harding’s foreign policy marked a clear break from the interventionist policies of the Progressive Era. While Harding himself believed in the importance of a strong, influential America, he also recognized that the country needed to focus more on domestic recovery in the aftermath of the war. As a result, his administration embraced a more isolationist stance, pulling away from European entanglements and prioritizing American economic interests. Despite this retreat, Harding’s presidency was not devoid of foreign policy action. His administration dealt with several key international issues, such as disarmament, Latin American relations, and the question of American membership in international organizations like the League of Nations.
This article will explore Harding’s foreign policy decisions, the motivations behind his retreat from global engagement, and the lasting impact of his policies on American foreign relations.
Post-War America: A Nation Seeking Peace and Stability
When Warren G. Harding assumed the presidency in 1921, the United States was recovering from the aftermath of World War I. The war had been devastating for the world, and the United States had only reluctantly entered the conflict after years of trying to remain neutral. The war’s toll on both soldiers and civilians, along with the social, economic, and political upheaval that accompanied it, left Americans exhausted. The sense of national idealism that had driven the country into the conflict under President Wilson began to give way to a more cautious and introspective mood.
Harding’s election in 1920 was largely a response to this war-weariness. His campaign slogan of “return to normalcy” promised an end to the idealistic, interventionist foreign policies of the Wilson administration and a return to domestic tranquility. Harding recognized the public’s disillusionment with international affairs and sought to focus on domestic prosperity, social stability, and economic growth. As a result, his foreign policy was one of retreat—a deliberate step back from the involvement in European conflicts and global governance that had marked the earlier years of the 20th century.
At the heart of Harding’s foreign policy was the belief that the United States should not be entangled in Europe’s complex political and military disputes. This marked a departure from the progressivism of the Wilson administration, which had been committed to international cooperation and the spread of democratic ideals through the creation of the League of Nations.
Harding’s Foreign Policy: Key Elements of Isolationism
Harding’s foreign policy was characterized by several key elements of isolationism and disengagement from international commitments. Rather than pursuing the vision of a world safe for democracy, as Wilson had advocated, Harding focused on protecting American interests while avoiding the kind of international entanglements that might lead to further conflicts. This approach was deeply in line with the sentiment of the American public at the time, which had grown weary of the effects of war and international engagement.
1. Non-Ratification of the Treaty of Versailles and Rejection of the League of Nations
Perhaps the most significant foreign policy decision of Harding’s presidency, though it technically occurred during the end of the Wilson administration, was the United States’ rejection of the Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations. Harding, who had opposed U.S. involvement in the League during his campaign, inherited a situation where the Senate had already refused to ratify the treaty in 1919. Harding did not seek to revisit the issue but rather allowed the policy of non-participation to stand.
The League of Nations was Wilson’s vision for ensuring lasting peace in the aftermath of World War I. It was an international organization that sought to mediate disputes between nations and promote collective security. However, the U.S. Senate, wary of losing its sovereignty or becoming entangled in European conflicts, overwhelmingly rejected the idea of joining the League.
Harding’s stance on the League of Nations reflected the public’s desire for a return to a more isolationist and self-sufficient foreign policy. The rejection of the Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations was one of the clearest signals that the U.S. was retreating from the world stage and that the nation’s future would be focused more on internal development than international involvement.
2. Naval Disarmament and the Washington Naval Conference
One of the few areas where Harding’s administration engaged with international diplomacy was the issue of naval disarmament. The Washington Naval Conference, held from 1921 to 1922, was a significant diplomatic achievement of the Harding administration. The conference aimed to limit naval armaments among the major world powers in order to reduce the potential for naval conflict and promote global stability.
The result of the Washington Naval Conference was the signing of a series of treaties that led to significant reductions in the size of naval fleets and established a system of ratios for the number of warships each country could maintain. The treaties were signed by the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, France, and Italy. Harding’s administration played a crucial role in these negotiations, which helped to maintain peace in the Pacific and prevent a naval arms race.
Although the Washington Naval Conference was a diplomatic success for Harding’s administration, it did not mark a fundamental shift away from isolationism. Harding’s support for naval disarmament was rooted in the belief that the United States could secure its interests through strategic negotiations rather than through active involvement in global military alliances. The success of the conference demonstrated that Harding was willing to engage in limited international cooperation, but he remained determined to avoid the kind of commitments that might draw the U.S. into another foreign conflict.
3. Latin American Policy: The “Good Neighbor” Approach
Although Harding’s foreign policy was primarily focused on avoiding entanglement in European conflicts, he also sought to establish more positive relations with the countries of Latin America. The United States had long viewed its southern neighbors with suspicion and often intervened in their internal affairs to protect American interests. However, Harding adopted a more conciliatory approach toward Latin American countries, which would later be expanded upon by his successors, particularly Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Harding’s approach to Latin America was based on the principles of non-intervention and respect for the sovereignty of neighboring nations. This was in contrast to the more aggressive policies of intervention that had been carried out under his predecessors. Harding’s administration emphasized economic cooperation, cultural exchange, and diplomatic efforts to foster better relations between the United States and Latin America.
The most notable example of Harding’s Latin American policy was his decision to reduce American military presence in Nicaragua and the Caribbean, signaling a shift away from the interventionist policies of previous administrations. Harding’s efforts to improve relations with Latin America were part of his broader vision for a more peaceful and cooperative approach to foreign policy.
4. The Return to Economic Isolationism
In addition to the political aspects of isolationism, Harding’s foreign policy also emphasized economic isolation. The United States, after the First World War, was a major creditor nation, and Harding’s administration sought to protect American financial interests by avoiding entanglement in foreign economic obligations. Harding’s belief was that the United States should prioritize domestic prosperity over international financial commitments, which meant avoiding the kind of European economic aid programs that had been proposed by some internationalists.
Harding’s administration largely ignored European debt, which had accumulated as a result of the war, and avoided any direct involvement in rebuilding efforts for war-torn Europe. Instead, the U.S. focused on its own recovery and economic growth, as it emerged from the war with a booming economy and strong industrial sector.
Harding’s Legacy in Foreign Policy: A Short-Term Retreat, but Long-Term Implications
Warren G. Harding’s foreign policy of retreat from the world stage was a reflection of the national desire for peace and stability after the trauma of World War I. Harding’s rejection of the League of Nations and his focus on domestic recovery marked a clear departure from the internationalism of the Wilson years. At the same time, his support for naval disarmament and his efforts to maintain a peaceful relationship with Latin America were notable exceptions to the broader isolationist trend of his presidency.
While Harding’s foreign policy was largely focused on avoiding further involvement in global conflicts, the longer-term implications of his actions can be seen in the shifting trajectory of American foreign policy throughout the 20th century. The rejection of the League of Nations and the retreat from European entanglements created an environment where the United States would, for the next two decades, largely disengage from international governance and diplomacy. However, this isolationism would be challenged by the rise of global threats like fascism and communism in the 1930s and 1940s, ultimately leading to the United States’ more active involvement in global affairs during and after World War II.
In the years following Harding’s death in 1923, his policies continued to influence American foreign relations. The U.S. would eventually embrace a more interventionist role in world affairs, but Harding’s retreat from the global stage in the early 1920s represented an important chapter in the evolution of American foreign policy.
Warren G. Harding’s foreign policy was shaped by the realities of post-war America, and while his retreat from the world stage may seem like a short-term retreat, it had significant long-term effects that helped shape the nation’s future approach to global affairs.