Over the recent past, the United States government has been trying to leverage diplomatic approaches to address the need to achieve regional integration and promote socio-economic and political interests. President Trump’s speech addresses numerous key issues adversely affecting the attainment of such fundamental goals. National policies and values play critical roles in ensuring that regional cooperation in trade and diplomatic relationships prevail (Wendt 516). Numerous social and economic issues tend to threaten regional integration, conflicts, perceived discrimination, and terrorism. Therefore, this paper analyses Trump’s speech considering the major paradigms.
President Trump’s Speech
The president’s speech emphasizes the need for increased regional cooperation and diplomatic relationships, particularly between the US and countries in the Middle East. From the speech, the president clarifies that hostilities among such countries have continued to impact negatively on the resultant diplomacy (Whitehouse.gov/briefings 11). President calls out to end decades of division and conflicts in the Middle East. He emphasizes unity, regardless of faith and background. The president notes unity is critical in the attainment of lasting peace and prosperity. In this regard, the opening of the Abraham Accords for Muslims worldwide is a milestone towards attaining improved integration and regional cooperation (Lenin 234). Over the years, people from the Middle East have lagged due to conflicts, hostilities, and lies based on perceived enmities between the Jews and Arabs. The foundations of such conflicts hinge on historical perspectives, and misconceptions passed down from one generation to another. Such issues lead to a vicious cycle of terror and violence (Burchill 623). The ensuing conflicts among the warring countries have adversely impacted the global economy, particularly in the war-torn regions.
From sociological perspectives, numerous paradigms impact regional cooperation and unity profoundly, as evidenced in President Trump’s speech. They include symbolic interactionist, functionalist, and conflict paradigms. Such concepts are critical in illuminating the main topic in the selected speech. For instance, the functionalism paradigm is crucial in understanding the need for peace and unity among conflicting nations in the Middle East. Therefore, the speech emphasizes that leaders need to develop social structures that address societal needs (Whitehouse.gov/briefings 13). Usually, a society consists of a structure with interrelated parts that are useful in meeting the individuals’ biological and social needs in societies (Burchill 653). The chosen speech mainly addresses the need for change in the Middle East. Attaining such fundamental progress requires the electorate to look beyond the existing laws, morals, values, religious beliefs, customs, and other aspects of cultural rules (Burchill). Dealing with conflicts based on misconceptions requires a re-evaluation of the current cultural values and belief systems, including the affected countries’ ethical and legal frameworks.
The symbolic interaction perspective can also explain the aspect of regional cooperation and integration. From the sociological perspective, the symbolic meaning that people drive from social integration is critical in addressing social issues in society. People tend to act in line with their interpretation of society’s meaning. The behavior triggers the need for leaders to adopt effective leadership in driving change. In his address, President Trump acknowledges the efforts of leaders of the Middle East countries for their commitment to enhancing peace and stability. Usually, the symbolic interaction emphasizes the need to address the subjective meaning that individuals impose on events, behaviors, and objects. For instance, the actions of terrorists are based on what they believe in as anchored on social values and belief systems.
Regional conflicts present unique challenges in social integration. The conflict paradigm is useful in explaining and addressing the root cause of disunity among various nations. Burchill alludes that inequalities in countries worldwide are some of the major contributors to perceived hatred and unending conflicts (634). In this perspective, the speech failed to identify effective approaches to attaining regional balance through improved internal and international policies on trade and countering dominant groups’ effects in society.
Alternative Viewpoints and Speaker Approach
Adopting an alternative viewpoint can be critical in obtaining a broader perspective concerning the issue addressed in the President’s speech. Frankel elucidates that calling for unity and peace among the countries in war-torn areas is one of the practical alternatives (247). In this regard, it is critical to identify and deal with the underlying causes of conflicts. In the president’s speech, he reflected more of a mixture than a purist approach (Moravcsik 544). The speech addresses issues impacting negatively on regional integration and peace. Such strategies are useful in providing a greater perspective concerning various issues addressed in the speech.
The speaker misses critical points associated with the main issue. For instance, the speaker addresses issues affecting the attainment of peace from the US’s perspective rather than those of the subjects. Imperatively, an understanding of the underlying causes of conflicts from the affected countries’ viewpoints is integral. With such knowledge, leaders can provide effective interventions in managing international issues affecting regional and international cooperation (Burchill 633). Accordingly, calling out for leadership changes is not enough in finding lasting solutions to the identified issues leading to the decades of war and division between the Arabs and Jews.
Sociological paradigms provide theoretical perspectives concerning the most appropriate approaches to addressing barriers to regional cooperation and integration between the US and its allies. Over the recent past, the United States government has been trying to leverage diplomatic approaches to address the need to achieve regional integration and promote socio-economic and political interests. Speech has been useful to drive these agendas. The selected speech highlights fundamental challenges impeding the achievement of peace and unity, especially between the Arabs and Jews. Adopting a broader perspective is crucial in dealing with the perceived inequalities and historical enmities among the warring factions.
Burchill, Scott. The National Interest in International Relations Theory. Springer, 2005.
Frankel, Benjamin, ed. Realism: Restatements and Renewal. Vol. 2. Psychology Press, 1996.
Lenin, Vladimir. Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism. Resistance Books, 1999.
Moravcsik, Andrew. “Taking preferences seriously: A liberal theory of international politics.” International Organization, vol. 51, no. 4, 1997, pp. 513-553.
Wendt, Alexander. “Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics (1992).” International Theory. Palgrave Macmillan, London, 1995, pp. 129-177.
Whitehouse.Gov/Briefings. whitehouse.gov/briefings. 2020. Web.