1. Reflect on the below research, overview, conceptual or theoretical framework and the related literature of Chapter 2 of the Dissertation - the Literature Review

2. Further identify a viable dissertation topic for which a Literature Review will be developed.

3. Reflect on past research.

4. Discuss research possibilities.

5. Compare and contrast divergent perspectives on policy issues.

The bottom is my paper I need help to do the above Summarize: ( Summarize)

Literature Review Assignment

Overview

A review of the US military policy in a historical and contemporary context reveals substantial evolution of a nation's defense force focused on the retention of independence in national development and protecting and advancing national interests internationally. The US military policy combines domestic defense strategies with foreign policy, all of which impact key elements of power, including cultural, intelligence, economic, informational, technological, legal, and diplomatic. The policy has been integral throughout the nation's independence period in identifying threats of aggression and hostility, defining military scope in the use of military technology, combat readiness, national security, and establishment of defense partnerships and alliances globally. It has been a useful tool in defining the country's national defense strategy and strategic posture towards real and perceived threats to national economy, security, environment, and territorial integrity. The policy aligns with biblical teachings that requires people to play their role in making all necessary preparations to be victorious. In Proverbs 21:31, the Bible says, "The horse is made ready for the day of battle, but the victory belongs to the Lord." This verse acknowledges that human beings have a responsibility of taking appropriate steps to be victorious in an event of a battle, and trust that God will do the rest in eventually granting the victory. The US military policy is constantly refined to ensure that the country is battle-ready while at the same time providing assurance of security through the deterrence function. Whilst the previous research has extensively reviewed various aspects of US military policy, there are limited studies on the increasing linkages between the US military policy with foreign policy in the 21^st century to advance national interests and national security This literature review will seek to bridge this knowledge gap by seeking to answer the research question "What is the influence of US military policy on its foreign policy?" This study will answer this question by discussing US military policy from a broader perspective, including synthesizing related theoretical framework on its link with foreign policy and integrating biblical perspectives on the top.

Theoretical Framework

This research applies several theories of defense diplomacy and international relations in evaluating the influence of the US military policy on the nation's foreign policy front. These theories include the theory of defense diplomacy, liberalism theory of international relations, and realism theory of international relations.

Theory of Defense Diplomacy

The defense diplomacy theory holds that a state can engage in the nonviolent use of military or defense capabilities and resources to advance its international agenda and foreign policy objectives. The theory of defense diplomacy gained prominence in the 1990s after the end of the Cold War and the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe (Winger, 2014). There was a concern that the end of Cold War would pose unique challenge to the Western Europe, particularly from the Eastern Europe nations involved in delicate transition to democracy. This concern was informed by the existence of large Soviet-style armies of countries that had amalgamated under the Warsaw pact that could derail the transition process and also reignite historic grievances previously suppressed by the Soviet domination (Liebenberg et al,2020). In response to these fears, the Western governments led by the United States and United Kingdom adopted a bold strategy of using their military resources to aid in the reconstruction of the armies of the former Warsaw pact countries (Katz, 2020). This strategy involved the peaceful employment of military resources, including implementing education programs and exchanging military personnel with armed forces of those countries. These nonviolent activities were used as means to reform the Eastern Europe militaries, as well as to instill democratic values of civil-military relations aimed at achieving the long-term goal of transitioning their societies from communism to democracy (Drab, 2018).

The defense diplomacy strategy embraced by the Western countries led by the United States highlighted the evolution of military policy as a tool of statecraft beyond its ability to use force. Katz (2020) observes that the defense diplomacy strategy was effective to a significant extent and resulted in reformation of militaries of Eastern Europe in a manner than that was through constructive engagement rather than through imposition of Western powers' will and influence. The success of this approach underscored the influence of military policy on foreign policy, particularly through the use of cooperation and collaboration to bring mutually desirable outcomes. According toLiebenberg et al (2020), defense diplomacy entails various activities. It involves multilateral and bilateral contacts between senior military officials of a state and military and/or civil defense officials of another or other states. Another common defense diplomacy activity is the appointment of military attaches to foreign missions (Drab, 2018). In addition, defense diplomacy activities involve training foreign military personnel and providing expertise on democratic control of the military and military technical functions. Besides, defense diplomacy entails ship visits, as well as exchanges and contacts between military personnel, deployment of training teams, and engagement in military exercises, and provision of military artilleries, among others (Winger, 2014).

Countries around the world, especially the powerful ones such as the United States are increasingly employing defense diplomacy to advance their national interests and national security. This trajectory is informed by the understanding of playing an important role not only in shaping security policy but also serving as a specialized instrument of foreign policy (Winger, 2014). As a result, defense diplomacy is occupying a permanent place in the international system, particularly in facilitating cooperation between states and non-state actors such as the international organizations (Drab, 2018). Having shaped after the end of the Cold War, defense diplomacy was integral in expanding the roles of military policy and structures of countries and in demilitarizing the international environment. Defense diplomacy theory asserts that as a practice, defense diplomacy is a core component of military policy inextricably linked with foreign policies of nation-states (Liebenberg et al,2020). It helps states to implement military policy that minimizes hostility between states and bolsters trust among actors in the international arena. In the context of international and regional involvement of states, defense diplomacy creates stable and lasting cooperation, thereby diffusing tensions between states, which in turn contribute to more sustainable peace and security (Katz, 2020).

Realism Theory of International Relations

Realism theory advocates for a robust and powerful military policy because to realists a country must have military resources and capabilities to defend itself and assure its national security (Wohlforth, 2014). Primarily, realism values armed forces equipped with large arsenal of weapons, large army, and air and naval forces as the means to offensive policies of a nation. Realism approach to military policy and foreign policy is anchored on the assumption that the international system is anarchic (Gaffney, 2018). Realists also justify powerful military prowess because they believe that the absence of a legitimate monopoly of power in the international system results in a strong incentive for states to strive for self-preservation and survival as their main goal and self-help thus serves as the most effective way of achieving this objective (Waltz, 2015).

As a theoretical framework, realism provides an understanding of the role of fear of global conflict in influencing military policies of nations, and how the same is intertwined with their foreign policies.Mehlman et al(2013) explain, from the realism theoretical perspective, US military policy can be understood as focused on achieving a defense strategy that has an enhanced competitive military advantage over other powerful nations in the world, especially its historical rivals, mainly, Russia and China. However, the realism theory is criticized for solely focusing on global power politics and ignoring other important issues that influence foreign policy, even within the context of military policy, such as domestic politics and the gains of global trade (Wohlforth, 2014). For instance, whilst realism assumes that the United States is engaged in all-out geopolitical war with China, the fact is that the two countries have areas of cooperation, especially in trade.

Using the realism lens, it can be argued that the US military policy influences the nation's foreign policy with the primary goal of promoting national interests and guaranteeing national security. This goal is achieved by constantly improving its military technologies and equipping its military with large arsenal of weapons, naval and air forces, expanding the size of military personnel, and strengthening nuclear weapons capabilities (Waltz, 2015). Besides strengthening its defense power, the US military policy is interlinked with its foreign policy to form alliances targeted at countering potential threats of adversaries, especially threats from traditional rivals and enemies, Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea (Mehlman et al,2013). The US relies on military policy to sustain its global hegemony, which is under constant threats from the aforementioned adversaries. This purpose is evidenced by the ever-increasing military and defense budget aimed at bolstering the nation's capabilities to deal with any security threats, especially from external aggressors (Feith et al,2017).

Liberalism Theory of International Relations

Liberalism theory of international relations revolves around the principles of international cooperation and mutual benefits among actors in the international system. Henke (2017) affirms that it is premised on the moral and political philosophy asserting political and legal equality of people and nation-states, in addition to acknowledging the role of international institutions in international relations, including their role in resolving disputes. In light of these principles, liberalism theory of international relations is troubled by militaristic foreign policies and suggests that domestic and foreign policy making should lower military spending (Beckley,2015). It advocates for the redirecting resources towards opening up space for civil societies to thrive and provision of guarantees to enhanced human rights and social protection. As already mentioned, liberalism theory emphasizes the role of international institutions in in the international system under the tenet called institutionalism. This tenet hypothesizes that international organizations significantly shape state's behavior in international relations (Glaser, 2015).

Whilst liberalism emphasizes minimalism in military policy-making, it provides a framework within which defense policy fits into the overarching foreign policy of a nation. In the case of United States, international organizations such as the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) have significantly influenced US military policy, which has in turn impacted its foreign policy (Henke,2017). For example, the United States provides leading role in NATO's activities, including protecting member states against aggression, as well as in entrenching democratic values in authoritarian countries that threaten national and international security and freedoms. A case in point is the US invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan following the 9/11 attacks (Goepner, 2016). The US led its key allies in NATO such as the United Kingdom and France to invade Iraq and Afghanistan to remove authoritarian regimes that were posing threat to America's national interests and global security by sponsoring terrorist groups such as Taliban and al-Qaeda.Henke (2017) argues that the US military policy pursues competitive and cooperative strategies to implement its foreign policy by working with military forces of other countries to facilitate peace and security. By working with these institutions, the US has demonstrated significant effort to balance the interests of international institutions and its goal to advance its national interests while competing favorably with other global powers (Beckley,2015). As a result, it has effectively managed to detach itself from the hegemonic posture that would otherwise have limited its role in international institutions, particularly in regard to promoting peace and mitigating conflicts (Kempin & Mawdsley, 2013).

Related Literature

There is an increasing body of research on the US military policy and its influence on the nation's foreign policy. Hastedt (2020) observes that while the influence of military policy on foreign policy has a long history, it gained greater prominence in the post-World War II. After the World War II, a Marshall Plan called the European Recovery Plan was initiated to aid the recovery of Europe from the ravages of the war and assist in rebuilding the war-torn European continent. The plan also sought to construct a stable foundation on which future allies could grow and expand structurally and socioeconomically (Drab, 2018). The United States under the presidency of Harry Truman led the recovery effort, which the United States considered it as an instrumental foreign policy tool focused on containing communism abroad (Eikenberry,2013). The World War II and its after-effects, combined with the implementation of the Marshall Plan, firmly integrated military policy into foreign policy strategies and also created a unipolar system, with United States as a sole superpower (Lake, 2013). The leadership of the US military was integral in establishing democratic governance during the reconstruction period, in terms of providing security and providing a platform for accelerated socioeconomic development, particularly in Japan and Germany (Kempin& Mawdsley, 2013).

With the role of the US military in the post-World War II era proving effective in influencing international relations, including in propelling the United States into a single global superpower, the nation needed to maintain this position in a new era of increased power competition in the international system. To achieve this objective, the United States continued to invest in its military as a means to sustain the growth of stability and security abroad (Feith et al,2017). Subsequent administrations after that of Truman, mainly those of President Lyndon Johnson, President Richard Nixon, President George H.W. Bush, President George W. Bush, and President Barack Obama thrusted military policy as a core component of the US' foreign policy (Gaffney, 2018). Under their leadership, overseas military engagements were integrated into the economic and social campaigns aimed at promoting global prosperity and neutralizing international security threats. Ebaye (2010) asserts that such efforts are connected to great power dynamics and are means to exercise national power to counter adversaries' development and military investments through a long-term strategy to advancing national interests and national security. To further augment the US' global influence, this kind of effort is being undertaken in different parts of the world, including Latin America and Africa with a particular aim of shoring up areas that are in the nation's strategic backyards (Hastedt, 2020).

The terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 (9/11) resulted in military policy becoming a backbone of the US foreign policy. The US embarked on a global effort to fight terrorism using a combination of approaches, with military force being the biggest method used (Drab, 2018). Under President George W. Bush, the United States led its allies in invading Iraq and Afghanistan because they were considered as havens for terrorists and their regimes provided logistical and financial support to terrorists and their activities (Eikenberry,2013). The 9/11 attacks renewed the attention of the US military as a critical actor in enabling the nation to protect itself from security threats and to prevent problems from escalating into bigger conflicts that could threaten global peace and security (Bojang, 2018). Although the US military policy and foreign policy were previously interlinked, the 9/11 attacks increased the interconnection between the two (Lake, 2013). The US military policy provided greater support to the foreign policy. As part of the US foreign policy, the US military policy became more focused on supporting building of the capacity of foreign military forces through various security assistance programs supported by the State Department and the Department of Defense (DOD) (Gaffney, 2018).

The growing national and global security threats require that the US military policy and foreign policy to combine both the traditional and contemporary avenues to respond to the swiftly evolving global threat environment (Kempin& Mawdsley, 2013). The DOD demonstrated this awareness as evidenced by its request to the Congress in 2006 to grant it the authority to equip and train foreign military forces in foreign countries, especially those considered to be in areas with emerging or urgent threats that could potential threaten US national security and interests (Ebaye, 2010). The Congress granted DOD's request and it presently has the authority to strengthen the capacity of selected foreign military forces to undertake counterterrorism operations, thus making the US military at the lead of the nation's foreign policy responsibility (Feith et al,2017).

However, as the US military continues to play a major role in shaping the nation's foreign policy, critics charge that this approach militarizes the US foreign policy (Liebenberg et al,2020). The critics also argue that US military's increased role in foreign has the potential of undermining the efforts of the State Department to advance the nation's interests globally. Hastedt (2020) argues that whereas the critics of DOD playing a greater diplomatic role cannot be dismissed, the overall analysis of the matter shows that this approach does not weaken the ability of the State Department to implement foreign policy. Instead, a holistic view of this arrangement shows that it is a more responsive approach that allows the entire government machinery to be proactive in responding to emerging threats to national security and national interests in the ever-changing global environment (Eikenberry,2013).

The US uses military policy to further its foreign policy objectives aimed at advancing and protecting its interests and security. As Gaffney (2018) notes, the military engagement in foreign affairs takes a broad approach that involves routine involvement in military operations, disaster response, training programs, and providing humanitarian support. These activities are deliberately assigned to make sure that the military programs are aligned with the US foreign policy goals (Lake, 2013). Through its broad range engagements, the US military influences the nation's foreign policy and shape the global security environment with the view of safeguarding national interests and security (Choi and James, 2016). It is a particularly critical focus considering that since the collapse of the Soviet Union, threats to America's interests and security have shifted from a two-power theater war to religious, ethnic, and regional conflicts (Drab, 2018). The new strategy that increased military role in foreign policy is thus effective in countering these new threats. It allows the US military to interact with foreign armies in a manner that enables it to work collaboratively towards a more secure and stable global society.

The nexus between the US military policy and foreign policy means that military is no longer considered as the last resort among the main elements of national power, others being economic, diplomacy, and informational (Choi and James, 2016). The US military is now considered a key player in foreign policy, including in regard to spreading democracy and fostering US bilateral and multi-lateral cooperations (Hastedt, 2020). The US military is taking a leading role in international relations by supporting key international institutions responsible in strengthening international peace, stability, prosperity, and security. For instance, it works collaboratively with the United Nations and NATO in humanitarian assistance operations and in security operations targeted at protecting democratic values and entrenching them across the world (Liebenberg et al,2020). Through various efforts by the US military in conjunction with other entities, it is helping the US to grow its diplomatic ties (Bojang, 2018). By participating in multilateral or bilateral military operations with foreign countries, the US military is increasing interoperability between the armed forces, provide opportunities to expand capabilities, and offer cultural exchanges (Kempin& Mawdsley, 2013).

In addition, the US military policy has proved to be an effective tool in tackling the major foreign policy issues relating to terrorism, human rights, and democracy. The US has responded militarily to threats of terrorism, human rights violations, and risks to democratic values and institutions in other countries (Drab, 2018). A study by Choi and James (2016) revealed that the US is likely to engage in military campaigns as a means to provide humanitarian support that focuses on human rights protection. The study also established that the US engages militarily when advancing its national interests and safeguarding its national security. The nation is aware of its hegemonic status and strives to maintain it, partly through investing in military. Different data have common finding that the US spends roughly as much as the rest of the world combined on defense (Choi and James, 2016; Wohlforth, 2014). This huge investment on defense positions it as the only nation capable of projecting military power worldwide. By virtue of this unique position, the US has been able to execute frequent military actions targeted at promoting democratic values, prosperity, peace, and security overseas (Liebenberg et al, 2020).

The important and unique place of the US military in influencing its foreign policy is underlined by the fact that the other potential occupiers of hegemonic status, China and Russia, possess limited economic and political resources. US' position is also augmented because China and Russia do not share America's self-identified ideas concerning human rights, freedom, and democracy (Bojang, 2018). All these factors combined, only the United States and its allies have the substantial ability to engage in international military interventions with degree of regularity. The US military policy's impact on shaping its foreign policy is aided by principles of liberal democracy that makes it easy for nations with shared values to cooperate to advance common interests (Henke, 2017). For example, the US military has found it easy to partner with democratic nations militarily, such as Germany and South Korea and to seek to achieve common objectives of neutralizing authoritarian regimes and making efforts to entrench democratic political systems across the world (Hastedt, 2020). The US and its allies have intervened militarily in countries that were under the grip of authoritarian regimes such as Iraq and Libya. Choi and James (2016) argue that while the effectiveness of the military interventions in promoting democracy in these countries is still debatable, there is consensus that the US projected its global power in regard to humanitarian intervention and based on the professed goals of promoting global peace, democracy, and human rights.

The important and effective role of the US military in influencing its foreign policy is further affirmed by remarkable successes recorded in places where the US military has maintained long-term presence. In countries like Germany, South Korea, and Japan, the US military has had a long-term presence, resulting in significant level of interoperability which has enhanced the US relations with them (Feith et al,2017). The strong bilateral relations between the US and each of these countries have been due to military diplomacy, which have in turn led to other benefits, key among them, enhanced trade and economic relations (Lake, 2013). The economic relations result in employment and contributes to economic growth of the US and these countries. These positive outcomes are a proof that military policy can directly impact foreign policy in ways that result in benefits outside military realm, including improved bilateral trade relations (Hastedt, 2020). Military relationships between countries create a basis upon which further connections between nations are built, contributing to desirable foreign relations outcomes, such as enhanced economic relations and better military interoperability that bolster security and stability prospects (Eikenberry,2013).

Undoubtedly, cumulative body of research points out to the significant influence of the US military policy on its foreign policy. Since the post-World War era, the US has been implementing military policy that is inextricably linked to its foreign policy, with the role of the former becoming more pronounced after the 9/11 attacks (Drab, 2018). The US military policy has been integral in sustaining US influence abroad in the face of an increasingly global security threats. Military diplomacy strategy employed especially in unstable areas have helped to curb migrant flows and their attendant adverse consequences (Feith et al,2017). Military and humanitarian engagements of the US army in Europe, Middle East, Africa, and in other places around the world has helped to neutralize security risk to America's interests and security, as well as those of its allies. The US military has proved effective in shaping the foreign policy by building partnerships and capabilities in maintaining global stability, peace, and security (Henke, 2017). The US State Department has capitalized on integrated military and foreign policies to protect the nation's interests and security. This approach has illustrated that whereas the military is known as a hard-power tool, it can also be used as a soft-power in diplomacy by moving their mission from the traditional warfighting to an expanded role of supporting the broader foreign policy initiatives (Hastedt, 2020). Using the integrated military and foreign policy approach enables the United States to take a more proactive strategy to mitigate vulnerabilities and to neutralize threats while advancing its interests worldwide.

Biblical Integration

Whilst the concept of separation of the State and the Church is clear, religious values are at the center of human existence and cannot be disentangled in decision-making of individuals and society as a whole. According to Reno (2019), the notion of Christian universalism does not imply that Christianity has to align with a particular political paradigm but Christian values and viewpoints can be used to restore unity and overcome divisions in the human race. As it has already been discussed, the aligning of the US military policy with the nation's foreign policy is, among others, aimed at promoting peace and preventing conflicts globally. At the center of achieving this objective is the military policy that seeks cooperation and alliances with militaries of other countries (Lake, 2013). For example, the US military is at the forefront of allied forces of NATO who have come together to protect member states from external aggression, and also to promote global peace. With US military being at the center of this unity, it is abiding by biblical teaching on the power of unity. In John 17:11-19, humanity is encouraged to foster unity because therein lies blessings (Manent, 2012). God has commanded a blessing when his people come together in unity as this way their collective efforts will be rewarded.

It should be noted that the influence that the US military has on the nation's foreign policy does not occur in a vacuum but rather driven by realities of human existence. As previously indicated, among the different objectives that the US military seeks to achieve abroad is the protection of human rights, especially of the most vulnerable people in oppressive and authoritarian societies. Marsden (2014) elucidates that the US military cannot be far off the discussion on faith-based diplomacy, particularly because of its role in inspiring justice, freedom and protection of inalienable rights. On several occasions, the US military has engaged in what can be described as "just wars" intended to defend justice and to protect innocent civilians (Fischer, 2020). In Matthew 25:40, Jesus encourages those with ability to show profound concern for the weak and the needy when he says, "Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least f these brothers of mine, you did for me." The US military incursions in countries under authoritarian regimes have often been meant to liberate the oppressed and to enable them to enjoy their inalienable rights and freedoms, their ethnicity, race, or religious affiliations notwithstanding.

Moreover, at the center of the US military policy's influence on the nation's foreign policy is the promotion of peace humanitarian support. Haynes (2014) explains that religious values greatly inspire foreign policies, especially around the issues of peace, stability and humanitarian assistance. The US military has been at the forefront of leading initiatives targeted at protecting global peace. Mathew 5:9 encourages people to commit to peacemaking and avoid conflict where it says "blessed are the peacemakers." Similarly, the US military initiatives involve providing humanitarian assistance to people affected by different forms of crises such as war, earthquakes, and flooding. These humanitarian efforts are in line with biblical teachings in Psalm 41:1, which says that "blessed are those who consider the poor and who are generous to the poor." Humanitarian support provided by the US military in different parts of the world reflects the biblical teachings on compassion and care, especially to the wretch and vulnerable of the society.