In the US at the end of the seventies socio-economic and cultural changes reached maturity that determined a conservative turn destined to mark the history of the country for a long time. It was not only a rejection of the libertarian counterculture elaborated by the new left movements in the 1960s, but also a crisis of the progressive, or liberal, ideology that was the foundation of the welfare state. The economic crisis and the industrial restructuring of the 1970s caused, in fact, the collapse of the Northeast, where the trade union movement was strong, and the growth of the Southwest, a land of rampant individualisms; at the same time, the “revolution of morals” of the previous decade pushed the Protestant fundamentalists and the Catholic ethnic groups to a conservative approach. The electoral blockade of the Democratic Party, as a result, deteriorated, leading to the crisis of the trinomial state, trade union, big industry on which liberal politics and the welfare state had governed since the New Deal.
This series of transformations made the Republican Party receptive to a form of conservatism far more capable of interpreting the mood of the population than the traditional one of B. Goldwater. The elaboration of the neoconservative ideology was the work of intellectuals, many already progressive, gathered around research foundations such as the American Enterprise Institute and the Heritage Foundation, who saw in the new left and in the programs of the Johnsonian “ large society ” a political culture which, having abandoned the “ American individualism ” based on the work ethic and on the centrality of family and religion, had replaced the concept of “ equality of opportunities ” that of ” equality of performance ”. The consequent growth of expectations in the population had caused an excessive expansion of state intervention and a contextual ungovernability that threatened individual freedom and caused inefficiency and anarchy. Against these evils the neoconservatives, and the even more radical New Right, intended to revive competitive individualism and traditional ethical values, supply side). Neoconservative ideas seeped into society through organization and social communications specialists, who combined them with the changing moods of public opinion through structures such as the Conservative Caucus or the Direct Mailing Organization, or, as in the case of the Moral Majority, the spread among the fundamentalist churches.
In view of the presidential elections of 1980, President JE Carter, weakened by the economic crisis and the international setbacks of the previous year, barely managed to get re-nominated by the Democratic Party, which preferred him to E. Kennedy, younger brother of President JF Kennedy, only because the latter appeared even more vulnerable due to his progressivism and some dark episodes of his private life. Meanwhile, the Republicans, almost certain of victory, found themselves choosing between two major candidates, R. Reagan and G. Bush. Bush, tied to the financial circles of the East and with a long career as a diplomat and director of the CIA behind him, did not possess the enthralling charisma of the former governor of California and, defeated in the primary, had to be satisfied with the candidacy for vice president. Reagan, on the other hand, proved to have a great capacity for communication, which allowed him to express the ideas of conservative radicalism, of which he was a champion, with a simplicity and a sense of optimism in stark contrast to the dark tones of traditional conservatism. Appealing to the moral revival of the US, in the November elections he obtained 51% of the popular vote and 489 electoral votes, against Carter’s 41% and 49 electoral votes; an overwhelming victory that highlighted the passage to the republican candidate of the traditional conservative democratic electorate of the South, as well as of the Catholic electorate of the North and which, accompanied by the Republican conquest of the Senate and a Republican advance in the House, was interpreted as a mandate to govern according to the neoconservative principles. possessing a great ability to communicate, which allowed him to express the ideas of conservative radicalism, of which he was champion, with a simplicity and a sense of optimism in stark contrast to the dark tones of traditional conservatism. Appealing to the moral revival of the US, in the November elections he obtained 51% of the popular vote and 489 electoral votes, against Carter’s 41% and 49 electoral votes; an overwhelming victory that highlighted the passage to the republican candidate of the traditional conservative democratic electorate of the South, as well as of the Catholic electorate of the North and which, accompanied by the Republican conquest of the Senate and a Republican advance in the House, was interpreted as a mandate to govern according to the neoconservative principles. possessing a great ability to communicate, which allowed him to express the ideas of conservative radicalism, of which he was champion, with a simplicity and a sense of optimism in stark contrast to the dark tones of traditional conservatism. Appealing to the moral revival of the US, in the November elections he obtained 51% of the popular vote and 489 electoral votes, against Carter’s 41% and 49 electoral votes; an overwhelming victory that highlighted the passage to the republican candidate of the traditional conservative democratic electorate of the South, as well as of the Catholic electorate of the North and which, accompanied by the Republican conquest of the Senate and a Republican advance in the House, was interpreted as a mandate to govern according to the neoconservative principles. which allowed him to express the ideas of conservative radicalism, of which he was champion, with a simplicity and a sense of optimism in stark contrast to the dark tones of traditional conservatism. Appealing to the moral revival of the US, in the November elections he obtained 51% of the popular vote and 489 electoral votes, against Carter’s 41% and 49 electoral votes; an overwhelming victory that highlighted the passage to the republican candidate of the traditional conservative democratic electorate of the South, as well as of the Catholic electorate of the North and which, accompanied by the Republican conquest of the Senate and a Republican advance in the House, was interpreted as a mandate to govern according to the neoconservative principles. which allowed him to express the ideas of conservative radicalism, of which he was champion, with a simplicity and a sense of optimism in stark contrast to the dark tones of traditional conservatism. Appealing to the moral revival of the US, in the November elections he obtained 51% of the popular vote and 489 electoral votes, against Carter’s 41% and 49 electoral votes; an overwhelming victory that highlighted the passage to the republican candidate of the traditional conservative democratic electorate of the South, as well as of the Catholic electorate of the North and which, accompanied by the Republican conquest of the Senate and a Republican advance in the House, was interpreted as a mandate to govern according to the neoconservative principles. with a simplicity and a sense of optimism in stark contrast to the dark tones of traditional conservatism. Appealing to the moral revival of the US, in the November elections he obtained 51% of the popular vote and 489 electoral votes, against Carter’s 41% and 49 electoral votes; an overwhelming victory that highlighted the passage to the republican candidate of the traditional conservative democratic electorate of the South, as well as of the Catholic electorate of the North and which, accompanied by the Republican conquest of the Senate and a Republican advance in the House, was interpreted as a mandate to govern according to the neoconservative principles. with a simplicity and a sense of optimism in stark contrast to the dark tones of traditional conservatism. Appealing to the moral revival of the US, in the November elections he obtained 51% of the popular vote and 489 electoral votes, against Carter’s 41% and 49 electoral votes; an overwhelming victory that highlighted the passage to the republican candidate of the traditional conservative democratic electorate of the South, as well as of the Catholic electorate of the North and which, accompanied by the Republican conquest of the Senate and a Republican advance in the House, was interpreted as a mandate to govern according to the neoconservative principles. against Carter’s 41% and 49 electoral votes; an overwhelming victory that highlighted the passage to the republican candidate of the traditional conservative democratic electorate of the South, as well as of the Catholic electorate of the North and which, accompanied by the Republican conquest of the Senate and a Republican advance in the House, was interpreted as a mandate to govern according to the neoconservative principles. against Carter’s 41% and 49 electoral votes; an overwhelming victory that highlighted the passage to the republican candidate of the traditional conservative democratic electorate of the South, as well as of the Catholic electorate of the North and which, accompanied by the Republican conquest of the Senate and a Republican advance in the House, was interpreted as a mandate to govern according to the neoconservative principles.
Reagan formed a government of experienced and well-known men (A. Haig for Foreign Affairs, C. Weinberger for Defense, D. Regan for the Treasury, as well as advisers E. Meese, D. Stockman, M. Deaver, J. Baker, R. Allen to the offices of the White House), which allowed him to establish a relationship of trust with Congress, where the conservative Democrats of the South supported him unreservedly. During 1981 he was able, therefore, to easily implement that new economic course which took the name of reaganomics and which, based on the ideas of supply side economics, intended to bring about a ” reindustrialisation ” of the US, at the same time solving the worrying public deficit (76.2 billion dollars in 1980) and reducing unemployment, which reached 7.6%. To this end, Reagan embraced the Kemp-Roth plan for a 30% tax cut over three years, accompanied by $ 50 billion in federal spending cuts in 1981-82 and the abolition of regulations governing important industrial sectors. Significant in this revolution aimed at strengthening the market against the state was that the president, true to his image as a friend of the sober and hard-working “ man in the street, ” avoided abolishing social measures aimed at the more solid working classes – pensions., unemployment benefits, health programs (Medicare) – and dropped the cuts on aid programs for the Third World and on those to support students and poor social groups – Medicaid, food stamps, AFDC (Aid for Families with Dependent Children) -, deemed immoral because they pushed those who they benefited from surviving without looking for work and which, in any case, benefited marginal or tenaciously democratic groups such as blacks. Recovering from his injuries sustained on March 30, 1981 in a bombing, Reagan got almost everything he asked for from Congress and in August he proved his strength by defeating the striking air traffic controllers in a confrontation that revealed the weakness of the entire trade union movement.
The Reaganomics seemed, however, to fail in 1982, when, following a further rise in oil prices, but also to incorrect predictions about the destination to save the amounts resulting from the tax cuts, which were instead directed to the consumer, the boom in imports brought the trade deficit to about 38 billion, production fell and unemployment grew to 9.7%. The following year, however, as parliamentary and popular opposition increased, the economy had a sudden reversal, with a spectacular recovery that in 1984 reduced unemployment to 7.5% and inflation to 4%. The complex and contradictory reasons include the delayed occurrence of the effects of reaganomics and the refusal of Congress to cancel spending programs, as well as the financing of growth with the budget deficit, which in 1984 reached 195 billion.
The economy was the area where the president took the most risk and built his administration’s success. In other fields he moved with a mixture of concrete actions and that ” symbolic politics ” that scholars consider specific to Reagan’s actions. Thus, if his “ new federalism ”, aimed at strengthening the states and even more the local communities against the federal government, had concrete institutional implications, it also served to support the specific way of acting of the president in the field of values that the New Right intended to restore. Reagan publicly supported movements that wanted to outlaw abortion, reintroduce prayer in public schools, and curtail racial integration programs in schools; but in his first term he made no legislative proposals on the matter. He preferred popular movements to take the lead, as was the case with the reintroduction of the death penalty in most states. For her part, she favored their action by appointing conservative judges to the federal judiciary and to the Supreme Court, where in 1981 she achieved success with the appointment of the first woman ever to reach that position, the conservative S. O’Connor.
The restoration of the prestige of the US in the world and the regaining of superiority over the Soviet Union were for the neocons a consequence of the moral recovery of the nation. Reagan therefore shifted the axis of foreign policy from North-South relations, privileged by Carter, to East-West ones. The confrontation with the USSR, which he defined as the ” empire of evil ”, immediately took on a ” cold war ” tone and led the new administration to a rearmament policy that caused military spending to jump from 5.3 to 6., 5% of GDP between 1981 and 1986. The pressure of US and international public opinion, frightened by the idea of an atomic holocaust, however, prompted Reagan to reopen the Geneva talks for the abolition of medium-range missiles (November 1981) and strategic ones (June 1982). This move, opposed by the administration’s hawks to the point of forcing Secretary of State Haig to resign, did not lead to any result because the Soviets rejected the so-called “ zero option ”, i.e. the proposal to cancel the deployment of Cruise and Pershing 2 in exchange for the dismantling of the Russian SS20s, when some European countries accepted the first ones on their territory. Relations between the superpowers continued to deteriorate in 1983, when a Korean airliner that entered Soviet airspace by mistake was shot down, and in 1984 due to the Russian boycott of the Los Angeles Olympics. If these events indicated that the US maintained the initiative towards a Soviet leadership immobilized by the problems of the succession of L. Brezhnev, who died in 1982, the US policy, conditioned by the bipolar scheme, proved insufficient in the other areas of tension.
In Central America the thesis of the Soviet-Cuban destabilizing plot led to unconditional support for the authoritarian regime of El Salvador and the contras, the anti-Sandinist guerrillas of Nicaragua; but the problems of Central America had roots that went beyond even real Soviet pressure and that the president did not want to recognize, to the point of incurring opposition from Congress, which since 1982 prohibited military aid to contras and cut those from the states of the region. While failing to achieve tangible results, Reagan was able to use his Central American policy to keep anti-Communist sentiment alive and above all for symbolic purposes, as in the case of the invasion that ended the Marxist regime on the small island of Grenada in October 1983. In the The Middle East, on the other hand, did not even come to that and went through an exhausting series of failures. The choice to strengthen the military presence in the Persian Gulf in an anti-Soviet function to the detriment of the Arab-Palestinian question, led to the deterioration of the situation in Lebanon, to the Israeli intervention in June 1982 and, this proved not to be decisive, to the direct intervention of the US with the 2000 Marineslanded in Beirut, the core of a multinational force. As a consequence of a poorly conceived policy, which also led to the failure of the proposal of the new Secretary of State, the moderate G. Shultz, for a Jordanian-Palestinian confederation with which to solve the problem of the territories occupied by Israel, the US found themselves bogged down in the question. Lebanese and, after two attacks that cost the lives of about three hundred US and French soldiers, they ended up withdrawing in February 1984 without results.
More attentive to domestic politics and relations with the USSR, US public opinion was not shaken by these failures, so much so that Reagan ran in the 1984 elections with a popularity rating, about 55%, higher than that of his entrance to the White House. The newfound prosperity was one of the reasons, but not the only one; more significant was the confidence the president had instilled in the nation and the belief that the “conservative revolution” was bearing fruit. This ideological climate made the continuing worsening of budget and trade deficits politically irrelevant, as well as the widening of the share of the population whose income was below the poverty line (the same percentage in 1964) from 11 to 15 per cent. This last figure, like the growth in employment pursued with the erosion of trade unions and the increase in underpaid employment in services, it could, however, be included in the conservative revolution, which was outlined as a project which, judging the political weight irrelevant and insufficient the moral value of the marginal social groups, intended to restore the efficiency of the system by decreasing the guarantees towards them. Alongside this, a traditionalist reform took shape, detectable for example. in the battles against the teaching of evolutionary biology, judged atheist, and which made its most illustrious victim in 1982, when the Eagle Forum, a conservative organization dominated by traditionalist Protestant groups, with its action prevented ratification by the states of the occupation pursued with the erosion of trade unions and the increase in underpaid employment in services, it could, however, be included in the conservative revolution, which was outlined as a project which, considering the political weight irrelevant and the moral value of social groups insufficient marginal, he intended to restore the efficiency of the system by decreasing the guarantees against them. Alongside this, a traditionalist reform took shape, detectable for example. in the battles against the teaching of evolutionary biology, judged atheist, and which made its most illustrious victim in 1982, when the Eagle Forum, a conservative organization dominated by traditionalist Protestant groups, with its action prevented ratification by the states of the occupation pursued with the erosion of trade unions and the increase in underpaid employment in services, it could, however, be included in the conservative revolution, which was outlined as a project which, considering the political weight irrelevant and the moral value of social groups insufficient marginal, he intended to restore the efficiency of the system by decreasing the guarantees against them. Alongside this, a traditionalist reform took shape, detectable for example. in the battles against the teaching of evolutionary biology, judged atheist, and which made its most illustrious victim in 1982, when the Eagle Forum, a conservative organization dominated by traditionalist Protestant groups, with its action prevented ratification by the states of the an increase in underpaid employment in services, however, it could be included in the conservative revolution, which was outlined as a project which, considering the political weight irrelevant and the moral value of marginal social groups insufficient, intended to restore the efficiency of the system by decreasing guarantees against them. Alongside this, a traditionalist reform took shape, detectable for example. in the battles against the teaching of evolutionary biology, judged atheist, and which made its most illustrious victim in 1982, when the Eagle Forum, a conservative organization dominated by traditionalist Protestant groups, with its action prevented ratification by the states of the an increase in underpaid employment in services, however, it could be included in the conservative revolution, which was outlined as a project which, considering the political weight irrelevant and the moral value of marginal social groups insufficient, intended to restore the efficiency of the system by decreasing guarantees against them. Alongside this, a traditionalist reform took shape, detectable for example. in the battles against the teaching of evolutionary biology, judged atheist, and which made its most illustrious victim in 1982, when the Eagle Forum, a conservative organization dominated by traditionalist Protestant groups, with its action prevented ratification by the states of the which was outlined as a project which, considering the political weight irrelevant and the moral value of marginal social groups insufficient, intended to restore the efficiency of the system by decreasing the guarantees towards them. Alongside this, a traditionalist reform took shape, detectable for example. in the battles against the teaching of evolutionary biology, judged atheist, and which made its most illustrious victim in 1982, when the Eagle Forum, a conservative organization dominated by traditionalist Protestant groups, with its action prevented ratification by the states of the which was outlined as a project which, considering the political weight irrelevant and the moral value of marginal social groups insufficient, intended to restore the efficiency of the system by decreasing the guarantees towards them. Alongside this, a traditionalist reform took shape, detectable for example. in the battles against the teaching of evolutionary biology, judged atheist, and which made its most illustrious victim in 1982, when the Eagle Forum, a conservative organization dominated by traditionalist Protestant groups, with its action prevented ratification by the states of the Alongside this, a traditionalist reform took shape, detectable for example. in the battles against the teaching of evolutionary biology, judged atheist, and which made its most illustrious victim in 1982, when the Eagle Forum, a conservative organization dominated by traditionalist Protestant groups, with its action prevented ratification by the states of the Alongside this, a traditionalist reform took shape, detectable for example. in the battles against the teaching of evolutionary biology, judged atheist, and which made its most illustrious victim in 1982, when the Eagle Forum, a conservative organization dominated by traditionalist Protestant groups, with its action prevented ratification by the states of the Equal Rights Amendment, which would have included the right to sexual equality in the Constitution and which was considered an expression of a destructive individualism of the family. The success and novelty of the Reagan presidency therefore consisted in its ability to amalgamate economic efficiency and individualism, moral traditionalism and religious fundamentalism in its political project, dragging disparate and distant sectors of the population behind it. This also led to the strengthening of the presidency office to the detriment not so much of Congress, as in previous decades, but of the party. The Republican Party, in fact, became the ” party of the president ” and, lacking a recognized collective leadership, was forced to accept the action of the PACs (Public Action Committees), groups mostly of the New Right committed to propagating a single issue and supporting candidates in favor of their positions. The PACs were the most important political novelty of the decade and they also established themselves in the Democratic Party, but without being able to make it become a majority in Congress.
In 1984, in view of the presidential elections, the major Democratic exponents moved to the reconquest of the party, which in their opinion fell into the hands of “amateurs” direct expression of the base, and found their candidate in W. Mondale, former vice president with Carter. Mondale did not turn out to be gifted with great personality and with difficulty he managed to get the nomination against the young technocrat senator G. Hart. The real news, however, came from the mayor of Chicago, the black Baptist pastor J. Jackson, who, despite no hope of obtaining the candidacy, conquered blacks and Hispanics with a strong program of reform. The presidential campaign between Reagan, reappointed without opposition by the Republicans, and Mondale was characterized by the second’s desperate attempt to recover the ten points of disadvantage that the polls assigned him; an enterprise also prevented by the revelations on tax fraud carried out by the husband of the candidate for the vice-presidency, G. Ferraro. As a result, Reagan, whose mostly televised campaign was based on a studied position of optimism, achieved a resounding victory, with a high percentage of votes, over his opponent, who only managed to prevail in Minnesota. his native state. The only shadows of the triumph were the very low percentage of voters (53.3%) and the Republican inability to improve its positions in Congress, already weakened by the 1982 elections.
The second Reagan cabinet was similar to the previous one, with the exception of the entry into Justice of the ultra-conservative E. Meese and, at the Treasury, of the moderate J. Baker who exchanged the post of Chief of Staff with D. Regan.of the White House. Regan in 1985, when the president was hospitalized for surgery, took on a role of shadow prime minister enough to push other advisors to resign. Therefore, Reagan’s habit of delegating key responsibilities to trusted men, if it allowed him to maintain his role as a great political inspirer, ended up creating a climate of intrigue and suspicion around the White House. The internal political problems that the president immediately had to face were those of the federal and trade deficit. Convinced that they were due to insufficient application of reaganomics, proposed a radical tax reform and further reductions to social programs. In Congress, the decline in party strength had increased the autonomy of senators and deputies, including Republicans, who were careful to demonstrate their independence to voters. It was therefore they who took the initiative: the two main laws of 1985-86, the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act and tax reform did not come from the president but from Congress. The first prescribed automatic budget cuts for many ministries (including the defense) in order to achieve balance, should Congress and the president not agree on the cuts to be made. The second reduced the federal income tax brackets (15% and 27%) to just two, canceling a forest of exemptions and favoring the lowest incomes, thereby initiating one of the largest tax reforms in American history. The two measures, although indicative of Reagan’s lesser political strength, were part of his philosophy of government and implied that all political parties now considered the need to downsize the role of the state to be taken for granted.
The results of the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act in the short term, however, they were not what was hoped for, so much so that in 1986 the budget deficit reached 221 billion. The fight against the trade deficit also proved to be difficult, a field in which the president, a convinced free-trader, worked in order to obtain self-limitations on exports to the US, especially from Japan, and in 1985 leading a controlled descent of the dollar. Nonetheless, in August 1986 the trade deficit reached 160 billion and it became increasingly difficult to resist the protectionist pressures of Congress. Inflation and unemployment continued to decline, however, allowing Reagan to keep his popularity intact, even as his political power continued to erode, as evidenced by the growing percentage of government measures rejected by Parliament (46.5%, and even 66% in the House). Significant defeats were, for example, those of the measures aimed at prohibiting abortion and reintroducing prayer in public schools, supported with sensational campaigns by E. Meese and the Minister of Education W. Bennett as part of the ” social agenda ” of the government.
The congressional elections of 1986 gave the measure of the changed political climate. Despite Reagan’s personal commitment, the Democrats strengthened their majority position in the House and recaptured the Senate. The president, however, continued to move to advance his ” conservative revolution ” in the administrative and, above all, in the judiciary. In 1986 the withdrawal of the Chief Justice W. Burger allowed him to promote the ultraconservative W. Rehnquist to the head of the Supreme Court and to appoint A. Scalia, the first Italian American to reach this position. The following year, despite twice the Senate refusing the ratification of his candidates, Reagan finally managed to establish a conservative majority in the Court (five out of nine) with the appointment of A. Kennedy. An event destined to have long-lasting repercussions on the constitutional jurisprudence of the US, in the sense, for example, of a restrictive interpretation of individual rights, given that the mandate of the Supreme Court judges does not expire.
The end of 1986 brought another storm on the executive. Press revelations indicated the existence of a covert arms sale operation to Iran, despite the congressional ban and the government’s strict anti-Khomeinist line, to obtain the release of US hostages captured in Lebanon by pro-Iranian organizations, three of which were were actually released. The administration could not long deny the existence of an “ arms for hostages ” agreement and shifted its line to support the president’s absolute personal extraneousness to the incident. The constitutional crisis was avoided; but it became clear that senior White House officials had been able to create a very delicate operation and contrary to official decisions. The Irangate affairwas further complicated by the revelation that the funds raised by Iran had been secretly used to send weapons to the contras of Nicaragua despite the congressional ban. The scandal led to the resignation of D. Regan and the National Security Advisor J. Poindexter, as well as the indictment of the latter and col. O. North who had physically carried out the operation. The president was able, with a heartfelt television intervention in March 1987, in which he assumed full political responsibility for wrong actions carried out without his knowledge, to regain public opinion; but his ability to control the political situation was seriously questioned. A further consequence was the end of the dominance of the radical wing, defeated in the administration by the moderates G. Shultz, H. Baker, the new Chief of Staff, and F. Carlucci, the new National Security Advisor.
In the last two years of his tenure, Reagan encountered increasing difficulties in advancing his program. His request to approve a constitutional amendment aimed at making a balanced budget mandatory was unheeded, as did the proposals to dismantle numerous agencies. responsible for economic development and regulation programs, and for privatizing parts of the postal and penitentiary systems. Only in some cases, such as in the most stringent anti-drug and illegal immigration legislation, did he find Congress ready to follow him; while in others, for example. the partial replacement of public housing programs with rental vouchers to be spent on the market had to accept strong anti-discrimination rules. The most significant legislation of the period was once again the work of Congress. Thus in the case of the foreign trade law of 1988, which the president vetoed unnecessarily and which, in the wake of fears over the government’s inability to contain the trade deficit, committed it to reprisals against countries guilty of protectionism or unfair practices. That is, the law of the same year, signed by Reagan only for electoral concerns, which imposed a period of notice for workers in the event of a layoff or closure of a factory. The result of the initiative of the Democratic Senator DP Moynihan, even if internal to that rethinking on the role of the state mentioned above, was also the law of 1988 that put in place the most profound reform of the rules ofpost-war welfare. To prevent social assistance from creating “ addiction ” to those who benefited from it, it required those applying for public subsidies to participate in state-organized education and job training programs, as well as a certain number of hours of free work per week. in community services.
In foreign policy, the second Reagan administration achieved notable successes in East-West relations, but it continued to appear to lack a certain strategy in other areas, even if in 1988 there were positive developments related to its general political line.
In the Middle East it was only in 1988 that Secretary of State Shultz was able to formulate a significant proposal, that of an international conference for the solution of the Palestinian problem which led in December to the first meetings between the US and the PLO of Y. ῾Arāfāt. Sharply rejected by Israel, which saw a disavowal of its privileged relationship with the US, the Shultz plan was blocked. Thus, the problems of the region remained unsolved, including that of terrorism to which the administration had given the highest priority and which had pushed it into a continuous confrontation with Libya, accused with Iran of helping Palestinian terrorists. The Middle Eastern entanglement, which had its other theater in the long Iran-῾Irāq war, provoked, as we have seen, the Irangate scandal, while in the Persian Gulf there was a dangerous tension between the US, engaged with the fleet to allow the passage of oil tankers, and Iran, which culminated in a series of naval clashes and in the mistaken shooting down by the United States of a plane of Iranian line in July 1988. The acceptance in the same month of the ceasefire by Iran, prostrate by the war, prevented further deterioration.
In the meantime, all the limits of the administration’s Central American policy had manifested themselves, which had made Nicaragua the test main line of his counter-reversal line, aimed at supporting anti-communist movements everywhere. It was, in fact, the Central American governments, not the US, who gave life in the autumn of 1987 to a peace plan that set in motion a series of meetings between the parties in conflict. The US found themselves embroiled in a difficult and passive position, aggravated by the rift between Congress and President, which was reflected in their powerlessness in front of the strongman of Panama, M. Noriega, accused of connivance with the Colombian cocaine cartel. Despite economic sanctions and military threats that occurred in the spring of 1988, Noriega managed, in fact, to remain in power.
The administration’s strategy, on the other hand, proved successful in relations with the USSR, because it accurately grasped the signs of crisis and novelty in the latter. The East-West interpretation of all regional conflicts, if it showed evident limits as regards their solution, allowed to exert pressure on the USSR which, engaged by M. Gorbačëv, secretary of the CPSU since spring 1985, in a deep internal review, was unable to support, as demonstrated, for example, the Soviet withdrawal from Afghānistān in 1988. Gorbachev was not a leader willing to simply manage the downsizing of Soviet power and, therefore, attempted the strategy of detente, establishing a direct relationship with Reagan which marked a turning point in international relations. The meetings between the two leaders (Geneva, November 1985; Reykjavik, October 1986; Washington, December 1987; Moscow, May 1988; Washington, December 1988) unlocked the negotiations on disarmament and led to the signing in 1987 of the INF treaty (Intermediate-range Nuclear Force) for the dismantling of medium-range missiles and to bring positions closer to the 50% reduction of ICBMs. Shultz and the negotiator P. Nitze were the American architects of the agreements at the basis of which, however, there was Reagan’s intuition. In the spring of 1983 he had announced the SDI program (Strategic Defense Initiative), a futuristic missile defense project of the American territory with laser beams placed on orbiting platforms (see space shield, in this Appendix). Although it proved to be technically unusable and downsized in its objectives, the SDI undermined Soviet missile supremacy and therefore the status of politico-military parity between the superpowers. Potentially destabilizing, it turned into a vehicle for peace when Gorbachev decided to use its impact to reach an agreement that would allow the USSR to reduce unsustainable military spending, and Reagan, always worried about an atomic war, followed him on the road. of disarmament.
The ratification of the INF treaty by Congress allowed Reagan to step triumphantly towards the conclusion of his presidency after which, in January 1989, opinion polls awarded him a 68% popular favor, the highest percentage of any president in the world. postwar period. With his third candidacy excluded from the Constitution, the field of contenders for the 1988 presidential elections was very dense. Among the Democrats it was the governor of Massachusetts M. Dukakis who won the nomination from a lot of opponents, among which only J. Jackson appeared endowed with real charisma. Dukakis played the card of efficiency-oriented progressivism to solve the problems of the deficit and mitigate the social injustices caused by the neocons. In the Republican field, Vice President G. Bush won over Senator R. Dole and on the candidates of the far right of the party, moving in the name of continuity with President Reagan, albeit among some significant distinctions, such as the commitment to maintain high moral standards in the action of the administration, to a struggle that is not only verbal against drugs and greater attention to the problems of the marginalized. Strengthened by the calmed international climate and supported by the constant improvement in the economic situation – during the year the trade deficit fell for the first time, reaching 127 billion at the end of 1988, and unemployment in turn dropped to 5.5%, while GDP growth held steady – Bush managed to reverse an initial disadvantage in the polls with an ideological campaign that portrayed Dukakis as a moving in the name of continuity with President Reagan, albeit among some significant distinctions, such as the commitment to maintaining high moral standards in the administration’s action, a not only verbal fight against drugs and greater attention to the problems of the marginalized. Strengthened by the calmed international climate and supported by the constant improvement in the economic situation – during the year the trade deficit fell for the first time, reaching 127 billion at the end of 1988, and unemployment in turn dropped to 5.5%, while GDP growth held steady – Bush managed to reverse an initial disadvantage in the polls with an ideological campaign that portrayed Dukakis as a moving in the name of continuity with President Reagan, albeit among some significant distinctions, such as the commitment to maintaining high moral standards in the administration’s action, a not only verbal fight against drugs and greater attention to the problems of the marginalized. Strengthened by the calmed international climate and supported by the constant improvement in the economic situation – during the year the trade deficit fell for the first time, reaching 127 billion at the end of 1988, and unemployment in turn dropped to 5.5%, while GDP growth held steady – Bush managed to reverse an initial disadvantage in the polls with an ideological campaign that portrayed Dukakis as a commitment to maintaining high moral standards in the administration’s action, not just a verbal fight against drugs and greater attention to the problems of the marginalized. Strengthened by the calmed international climate and supported by the constant improvement in the economic situation – during the year the trade deficit fell for the first time, reaching 127 billion at the end of 1988, and unemployment in turn dropped to 5.5%, while GDP growth held steady – Bush managed to reverse an initial disadvantage in the polls with an ideological campaign that portrayed Dukakis as a commitment to maintaining high moral standards in the administration’s action, not just a verbal fight against drugs and greater attention to the problems of the marginalized. Strengthened by the calmed international climate and supported by the constant improvement in the economic situation – during the year the trade deficit fell for the first time, reaching 127 billion at the end of 1988, and unemployment in turn dropped to 5.5%, while GDP growth held steady – Bush managed to reverse an initial disadvantage in the polls with an ideological campaign that portrayed Dukakis as acompliant liberal in the fields of the fight against crime and drugs. In November, although Dukakis showed more strength than expected by winning 46% of the popular vote, Bush won easily, even as the Democrats strengthened their majority in Congress.
Bush, a traditional conservative tied to the values of the Northeast economic establishment, came to the presidency at a time when the Republican Party had espoused the populist and aggressive conservatism born in the Southwest of the country. A movement that he did not fully understand and of which he was unable to become the leader, but to which the weight of Reagan’s legacy forced him to remain faithful. With no real domestic policy agenda – beyond the intentions of creating a more humane America toward its citizens – Bush enthusiastically devoted himself to foreign policy. In this field too he had a cautious and traditional vision, so much so as to give the idea of believing that the Soviet Union still personified the Communist danger. Only after Moscow’s failure to intervene in the dramatic events that led to the collapse of the Communist regimes in Europe and the fall of the Berlin Wall, was he convinced of Gorbachev’s reform intentions, whom he met on 2-3 December 1989 in Malta. An ” informal ” summit with no immediate results, which nevertheless demonstrated the possibility of true collaboration between the two superpowers.panamain this Appendix).
Throughout 1989 Bush’s action was facilitated by the positive trend of the economy, which registered a growth of 2.5% of GDP, with unemployment reduced to 5.3%. However, the situation slowly began to worsen in the first months of the following year and at the end of 1990 there was talk of a crisis. The reasons for the change were not only of a cyclical nature, but came from the legacy of the Reagan presidency, which had caused the production system to lose competitiveness and started a dangerous spiral of public debt on the domestic and international markets to finance federal spending without resort to taxes. Reagan’s fiscal policy had also caused a worsening in the distribution of wealth – only 20% of families, the richest, they had improved their income – with negative consequences on consumption. Added to this were the saturation of the service sector, now unable to absorb the labor expelled from industry, and the signs of a financial crisis in various states and cities, which were unable to achieve the balanced budget they were obliged to achieve.
The deterioration of the economic and social situation was not matched by a desire for common action. The ideological fractures of the 1980s, in fact, deepened to the point of fear of a sort of fragmentation of the country. The conservative movement, within which Christian fundamentalism was growing, insisted on the end of the welfare state and on the intervention of the state to impose the values of tradition, in order to eliminate the “ habit of dependence ” that public social policies had engendered in individuals and which the movement believed was at the origin of the immorality of the middle classes and degradation of urban ghettos. On the other hand, there was the radicalism of blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans, as well as that of the movement of women and homosexuals, who no longer demanded equal rights but the recognition of the “ right to difference ”, that is to say a equal treatment between their specific cultures and the values of whites and men.
The Democrats, still reeling from the defeats of the 1980s, did not allow themselves to be drawn into this clash in 1990 and, faithful to the new orthodoxy of balanced budget that they had also embraced, they preferred to attack Bush’s budget policy for his inability to achieve breakeven. After a tiring struggle, the budget was approved only a few days before the November electoral deadline, with a compromise that weakened the president, forced to recognize the need for tax adjustments, but which also indicated the absence of a clear political proposal among his opponents, who in fact obtained only a modest victory in the mid-term elections. The very low turnout, just 36.4%, also signaled a widespread disaffection for politics.
In any case, during the 1990s domestic politics took a back seat in the face of international events. The process of normalizing relations with the USSR proceeded swiftly with the summit of Washington on May 31-June 3, during which commercial relations were normalized, the signing of the START treaty for the reduction of strategic nuclear weapons was approached and the one for the reduction of chemical weapons was signed; but the prevailing optimism was interrupted in early August by the Iraqi invasion of the emirate of Kuwait. The Bush administration, taken by surprise, reacted promptly by declaring that it did not accept the fait accompli and sending ships and troops to the Arabian Gulf and Saudi Arabia. In the following months, the president managed to form a large international anti-Iraqi coalition, playing on deep enmities within the Arab world and on European and Japanese dependence on Gulf oil. Bush did not try to investigate the regional causes of the crisis with an approach more suited to the nineties, but chose the path of a frontal ideological clash and military alliances hegemonized by the US, typical of the ” cold war ”. In any case, Bush was successful. The intransigence of the Iraqi president Ṣ. Ḥusayn paved the way for a unanimous UN Security Council resolution of November 29, 1990, which authorized the use of force to force Iraqis to withdraw. The operation unanimous resolution of the UN Security Council of 29 November 1990, which authorized the use of force to force Iraqis to withdraw. The operation unanimous resolution of the UN Security Council of 29 November 1990, which authorized the use of force to force Iraqis to withdraw. The operation Desert storm, which began on January 16, 1991 with massive US and allied aerial bombardments, continued on February 24 with a ground attack that overwhelmed Iraqi forces and liberated Kuwait in four days. The speed of victory, achieved against all odds with slight casualties, made the commander of the US forces, General N. Schwarzkopf, a hero, unleashed a wave of patriotism and raised the President’s Popularity Index to over 85%., although many did not understand why the war did not continue until the fall of Ṣ. Ḥusayn. In reality, Bush, worried about the power vacuum that could have been created in ῾Irāq and the possibility of a long military campaign, preferred to stick to the contents of the United Nations resolutions that did not contemplate the fall of Ḥusayn.
Bush took advantage of the success to initiate a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The end of the ” cold war ” had made Israel less important for the strategic purposes of the US, as demonstrated by the decision by which they asked the Israelis not to respond to Ḥusayn’s missile attacks during the Gulf War. A series of visits to the Middle East by Secretary of State J. Baker led to the convening of the Madrid Peace Conference on October 30, 1991, under the joint presidency of the US and the USSR. In the meantime, however, despite and perhaps also because of the third summit Bush-Gorbachev – which took place in Moscow at the end of July and led to the signing of the START treaty -, in August there was the failed coup against Gorbachev which made B. El’zin a true protagonist of Russian politics and it quickly led to the breakup of the Soviet Union.
At the end of 1991 the US, after the ” cold war ” with the dissolution of the USSR, remained the only world superpower. The victory in the Gulf, the start of the Arab-Israeli peace process which continued successfully in 1992, the cooperation with the Russian leader El’zin which led to the signing of an even more incisive START II agreement, the growing difficulties of the Castro regime in Cuba, as well as improved relations with China and Vietnam, seemed to indicate the advent of a new pax americana. The successes, which seemed almost automatic, raised questions about the country’s role in the new international situation and in a global economy, to which the president seemed unable to provide answers.
On April 29, 1992 in Los Angeles, after the unjust acquittal of some policemen accused of violence against a black man, a racial riot broke out that lasted six days and resulted in 58 deaths. It was the sign of a profound political crisis. Suddenly the country seemed to realize that the president had not been able to find the key to resolving ideological conflicts and the problems of drugs and violence, just as his economic policy had failed, linked in a non-innovative way to Reagan’s measures to reduce taxes, which had not prevented the rise in unemployment to 6.7% and the decrease of 0.6% of GDP in 1991, as well as a forecast of 351 million dollars in deficit for 1993. In June, finally, the Court supreme,
Bush, who at the end of 1991 was so strong as to push the major Democrats, starting with the governor of New York M. Cuomo, not to run for presidential candidates, in the spring of 1992 appeared weakened and put under attack even by the religious right of his party, led by P. Buchanan. Suddenly the little-known aspiring Democrats seemed to have a chance of victory. Among them emerged the young governor of Arkansas, WJ (Bill) Clinton, who obtained the nomination with a centrist program, which, if it promised the reform of the health system to include in it all the citizens of the US, recognized the need to contain expenses and taxes, to tie welfare state contributions to accept retraining programs and to closely combine prevention and repression in the fight against crime and drugs.
The appearance of an independent candidate, billionaire R. Perot, who gained a large following especially among potential Bush voters with a libertarian and anti-statist program, further weakened the president, who failed to mount an effective election campaign. In November Perot won 19% of the votes and contributed to the defeat of Bush, who obtained 37.5% with 168 electoral votes, against 43% and 480 electoral votes for Clinton.
Despite the Democrats’ victory after three presidential defeats, the nation’s majority remained conservative in 1992. President Clinton, who also had a friendly Congress, had to demonstrate to an ideologically divided country that a socially equitable and at the same time non-statist reform policy capable of proposing unitary values was possible. In the next two years he did not seem to succeed in this aim. His health reform project, opposed by insurance companies who feared serious losses and by employers who would have to bear much of the costs, was in fact defeated in Congress after a year and a half of struggle, while the congressional elections of the autumn 1994, marked by a further advance of the Christian right.
