Conservative Shift of Congress and U.S.Post-Cold War Foreign Policy

20世纪90年代的美国外交政策经历了国际层面和国内层面的双重变化。从某种意义上说，国内的右倾是由冷战结束引起的。但美国政治的这种保守转变对冷战后国际秩序的建立产生了负面影响。20世纪90年代的保守主义可以分为两大派别：社会保守主义和财政保守主义。前者自20世纪70年代以来变得引人注目，后者在美国政治史上周期性地占据主导地位，尽管在当今时代更为极端。这在一定程度上是由于美国政治的全面右倾，包括克林顿的第三条道路，这迫使保守派更加右倾。国会是保守派制定政策的主要工具。财政保守主义倾向于减少外交支出，增加国防基金，这是孤立主义的政策方向。社会保守派通过制裁将美国价值观，尤其是基督教价值观强加于他人。由于反对堕胎而拒绝增加国际货币基金组织的资金，使其他国家对美国作为冷战后国际秩序的领导者失去了信心。国会共和党人，尤其是众议院的共和党人，只经历过少数党地位，这一事实也影响了这一发展。共和党人缺乏多数党通过法律的责任，却擅长作为少数派就原则进行辩论。因此，面对2000年总统选举，重新思考保守主义的意义，不仅在国内，而且在外交政策领域，都能纠正保守主义的极端倾向，对美国社会有好处。

American foreign policy in the 1990s experienced changes both on the international level and the domestic level.In a sense, the domestic shift toward the right was induced by the end of Cold War.But such conservative shift of American politics has worked negatively in the establishment of the post Cold-War international order.The conservatism in the 1990s can be divided into two major groups : social conservatism and fiscal conservatism.The former became conspicuous since the 1970s, and the latter cyclically became dominant in American political history, although more extreme in the present time.This is partly due to the over-all right shift of American politics, including Clinton's third way, which forced the conservatives to be more so.Congress serves as the major vehicle of conservative policy making.Fiscal conservative pursued its agenda by cutting diplomatic expenditure while increasing national defense fund, an isolationist policy direction.Social conservatives forced American values, especially Christian values, upon others by imposing sanctions.Such case as refusing IMF fund increase because of the opposition to abortion caused among other nations the loss of confidence in the United States as the leader of post Cold-War international order.The fact that Congressional Republicans, especially on the House side, only experienced the minority status affected this development as well.The Republicans lacked in the responsibility of the majority to pass laws, while were good at debating on principles as minority.The re-consideration of what conservatism means in the face of 2000 presidential election, thus, might serve American society well, by rectifying the existing extreme trend of conservatism, not just in domestic arena but in the foreign policy area..