Editing Kirkpatrick Doctrine

{{Short description|Principle in 1980s U.S. foreign policy}}
{{More citations needed|date=June 2024}}
The '''Kirkpatrick Doctrine''' was a foreign policy doctrine expounded by [[List of ambassadors of the United States to the United Nations|United States ambassador to the United Nations]] [[Jeane Kirkpatrick]] in the early 1980s based on her 1979 essay, "[[Dictatorships and Double Standards]]".<ref name=":0">Jeane Kirkpatrick, "[http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/dictatorships--double-standards-6189 Dictatorships and Double Standards] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110204172141/http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/dictatorships--double-standards-6189 |date=2011-02-04 }}," ''[[Commentary Magazine]]'' Volume 68, No. 5, November 1979, pp. 34–45.</ref>  The doctrine was used to justify [[Foreign policy of the United States|U.S. foreign policy]] of supporting [[Third World]] [[Anti-communism|anti-communist]] [[dictatorship]]s during the [[Cold War]].<ref name="jpost">{{cite news
 |title      = Middle Israel: The new world order
 |work       = The Jerusalem Post
 |date       = 2006-12-14
 |url        = https://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Middle-Israel-The-new-world-order
 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20161123150526/http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Middle-Israel-The-new-world-order
 |url-status = dead
 |archive-date = 2016-11-23
 |access-date = 2007-08-16
}}</ref>

==Doctrine==
Kirkpatrick claimed that states in the [[Eastern Bloc|Soviet bloc]] and other [[communist state]]s were [[Totalitarianism|totalitarian]] [[regime]]s, while pro-[[western world|Western]] dictatorships were merely "[[Authoritarianism|authoritarian]]" ones. According to Kirkpatrick, totalitarian regimes were more stable and self-perpetuating than authoritarian regimes, and thus had a greater propensity to influence neighboring states.

The Kirkpatrick Doctrine was particularly influential during the administration of [[President of the United States|President]] [[Ronald Reagan]]. The Reagan administration gave varying degrees of support to several militaristic anti-communist dictatorships, including those in [[Guatemala]] (to 1985), the [[Philippines]] (to 1986), and [[Argentina]] (to 1983), and armed the [[Afghan mujahideen|Afghan ''mujahideen'']] in the [[Soviet–Afghan War]], [[UNITA]] during the [[Angolan Civil War]], and the [[Contras]] during the [[Nicaraguan Revolution]] as a means of toppling governments, or crushing revolutionary movements, in those countries that did not support the aims of the U.S.<ref name="Chomsky 1985">{{cite book|last=Chomsky|first=Noam|title=Turning the Tide|year=1985|publisher=South End Press|location=Boston, Massachusetts|isbn=0-89608-266-0|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/turningtideusint00chom}}</ref>

According to Kirkpatrick, authoritarian regimes merely try to control and/or punish their subjects' behaviors, while totalitarian regimes move beyond that into attempting to control the thoughts of their subjects, using not only [[propaganda]], but [[brainwashing]], re-education, widespread domestic [[espionage]], and mass [[political repression]] based on state [[ideology]]. Totalitarian regimes also often attempt to undermine or destroy community institutions deemed ideologically tainted (e.g., religious ones, or even the [[nuclear family]]), while authoritarian regimes by and large leave these alone. For this reason, she argued that the process of restoring democracy is easier in formerly authoritarian than in formerly totalitarian states, and that authoritarian states are more amenable to gradual reform in a democratic direction than are totalitarian states.{{Citation needed|date=January 2010}}

==Criticism==
Kirkpatrick's tenet that totalitarian regimes are more stable than authoritarian regimes has come under criticism since the [[Dissolution of the Soviet Union|collapse of the Soviet Union]] in 1991, particularly as Kirkpatrick predicted that the Soviet system would persist for decades.

Ted Galen Carpenter of the [[Cato Institute]] has also disputed the doctrine, noting that while communist movements tend to depose rival authoritarians, the traditional authoritarian regimes supported by the U.S. came to power by overthrowing democracies. He thus concludes that while communist regimes are more difficult to eradicate, traditional autocratic regimes "pose the more lethal threat to functioning democracies."<ref>[http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa058.html "The United States and Third World Dictatorships: A Case for Benign Detachment"] Ted Galen Carpenter. Cato Policy Analysis No. 58, August 15, 1985</ref>{{undue inline|reason=not a notable critic|date=June 2024}}

== See also ==
* [[Big stick ideology]]
* [[Reagan Doctrine]]
* ''[[Realpolitik]]''
* [[Rollback]]
* [[The Heritage Foundation]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

{{Foreign relations of the United States |expanded=DPC}}

[[Category:Foreign policy doctrines of the United States]]
[[Category:Presidency of Ronald Reagan]]