Oftentimes, a deciding factor for a president’s reputation is his involvement in foreign affairs. Though Richard Nixon’s terms have been deservedly cast into a bad light, historians still quarrel about his international policy. Interestingly enough, the very traits which made him so despised as a public officer—his paranoia, lying, backstabbing, distrust, opacity, etc.—these traits made him an fascinating figure on the global stage. Instituting a policy coined “détente,” he sought separate peaces with the Soviet Union and China so as to subversively convert these communist foes into allies. He also wished to bring “peace with honor” to the Vietnam War through a practice nicknamed “Vietnamization.” To accomplish these two tasks, Nixon consolidated them under a single goal: the reduction of military spending. To accomplish that goal, President Richard Nixon relied on the dirty tactics he knew best and almost succeeded. The problem? His dirty tactics got in the way. Détente is a fascinating policy in and of itself. In order to draw the two challenging superpowers closer to America, Nixon decided that he would have to play off the mutual fears of the other. In other words, he told both China and Russia the same things and just substituted in the opposite country’s name. In the end, a shaky peace was established between the heretofore-irreconcilable ideologies of Communism and Capitalism. Through it came a flood of treaties and agreements which paved the way towards
Nixon used his power of executive agreements manipulatively in a strategy that he called, linkage politics; this is a term for strategically organizing the United States relationships with communist powers (Small 1999, 63). Nixon knew that he must settle the Vietnam War with honor because it was a stake in Southeast Asia. Using his theory of linkage politics he saw that the end of the Vietnam War would affect negotiations with China and Russia (Small, 1999 65). He first tried to make an executive agreement with Russia, by explaining to them his idea of “strategic parity. This was an idea that because both nations had enough weapons to completely demolishes the other, neither should start war, and peace would continue. Like Eisenhower’s attempts, Nixon was unable to make an agreement with the USSR and talks continued to be slow (PBS Nixon 2002, 2).
One major event occurred on January 20, 1969, with the inauguration of President Nixon.1 To this point the war as seen three U.S. Presidents apply their own theory to win the war and now a fourth was about to inject his own method to end the war that has generated a political and public relation nightmare for the United States. President Nixon decided to attack the war from a platform of “the madman theory” where political moves and offers would be posed to the North Vietnamese supporter, Soviet Union, during the Paris negotiations.2 Along with the new play at the negotiation table, President Nixon supported his attempts with an escalation in bombings to include targets in Cambodia, potentially forcing the Soviet Union to remove itself from a war that may become out of control.3 It was obvious this method, like others previously, did not have the intended effect.
In fact, early on into his first term, Nixon visited China to discuss Sino-US relations and world affairs.To start off, the monolouge of the trip stated that “The U.S. side stated: Peace in Asia and peace in the world requires efforts both to reduce immediate tensions and to eliminate the basic causes of conflict.” This was supportive to the idea that the US wanted to avoid conflict with China at all costs. Furthermore, the US did not want to appease the Chinese to just achieve peace; they had clear demands of their own that needed to be met. The capitalist victory over communism in Indochina, was one of these goals. This was stressed by the US in the monologue of President Nixon’s trip to China as well: “The United States stressed that the peoples of Indochina should be allowed to determine their destiny without outside intervention; its constant primary objective has been a negotiated solution.” It is to the United States’ preference that the vietcong and North Vietnamese forces be cut off from Chinese supplies. To achieve this, the United States made their demands before a conflict arose to ensure that an ignored threat did not become
In conclusion, President Nixon and Soviet leader Brezhnev developed detente from 1969 to 1979 because of the overwhelming fear of a possibility of a nuclear war. The cost of the arms race had taken an immense toll on the economic stability of both the United States and the Soviet Union, causes both leaders to adopt a more pragmatic view of the Cold War. The European countries involved in the Cold War were also taking steps to relax tensions between the countries divided by the iron curtain. This caused both nations to develop this period of detente and establish treaties through the Arms Limitations
Born in 1913 in Yorba Linda, California, Richard Milhouse Nixon was raised in a Quaker home with his four brothers, mother and father. His family led a docile life by abstaining from all dancing, swearing, drinking and other common Quaker practices (Barron 12). Financially, the family struggled and he could not afford to attend Harvard University even with a full-ride scholarship. Instead, Nixon enrolled at Whittier College, a popular Quaker college close to home (Barron 39). Nixon began dominating all of his academics and it was at Whittier where he began to shape his future political career.
Nixon and Kissinger’s foreign policy was predicated on the European tradition of realpolitik--- a pragmatic approach to politics where the the state’s strategic interests supersede its parochial and ideological convictions. This was a departure from the status quo where foreign policy was in large part denominated in a state’s moral principles. Nixon and Kissinger’s foreign policy could be seen to fall under the rubric of neoclassical realism: it incorporates both the systemic conditions faced by the state, and the internal material resources at the state’s disposal to respond to external threats. Proponents of neoclassical realism
Scandal! I am not a crook, Watergate, impeachment, resignation, one final “two handed V”; which president comes to mind? President Richard M. Nixon was a visionary leader; but an unethical leader. This paper will examine two visionary leadership traits of President Nixon, two unethical leadership skills of Nixon and then look to my own career for two personal examples of visionary and two unethical leadership skills I portrayed. Nixon’s visionary leadership was on display when it came to dealing with Communist countries and recession on the home front. By using the full range leadership (FRL) process of contingent reward, Nixon focused relations with China to establish common political grounds. Using cognitive adaptability, Nixon was able to reign in the 1970’s recession. He applied FRL tactics to push his agenda towards politics and economic policy. But, Nixon’s unethical leadership trait, drive for success, led to the Watergate Scandal. Also, he failed to use the reasoning element of implication when he discharged the Special Prosecutor of the Watergate investigation. After discussing President Nixon’s visionary but unethical leadership, I’ll apply these same principles to myself by showing examples of how I used contingent reward and cognitive adaptability techniques in my Air Force career. Finally, I’ll discuss how drive for success
The author demonstrates President Nixon’s paranoia vividly. Another lesson learned is that presidents Clinton and Nixon are considered to be more politically cunning and knowledgeable than the other presidents reviewed, however, the two did not master their personal weaknesses. For instance President Nixon eventually had to resign due to his role in the Watergate scandal. President Ford who was the first unelected president in US’ history and he is praised for the role he played of restoring the public’s faith in government. Nixon is also described as a great historian with a great foresight. It is Nixon who is credited with shaping America’s foreign policy that ensured the US became a world leader and helped create peace with other world powers,
Richard Nixon's presidency is one of the most examined, analyzed and discussed, yet least understood, of all the American administrations in history. While many factors still remain to be discovered, and many mysteries are left to be resolved, we need to do the best that we can to make sense of this secretive president of our past and his era. He is the one American figure about whom very few people don't have strong feelings for. Nixon is loved and hated, honored and mocked . The term 'Watergate', labeled by Congress in 1974, stands for not only the burglary, but also for the numerous instances of officially sanctioned criminal activity and abuses of power as well as the obstruction of justice that preceded the actual break-in.
Richard Nixon, though created a large credibility gap within the US, he accomplished a lot for the country. He served five years in the presidential office as a republican (1969-1974), and he was the only president to resign from office in history. Although through his presidency he had accomplished many things, such as creating revenue sharing, ending the draft, and creating anticrime laws, he still had a rough time rebuilding his reputation after many assumptions of corruption in his office. Though he never admittedly pledged guilty to his crimes of taking government funds for his own personal gain, there was proof that he was. After the Watergate scandal, the American people set their mind to believe what the proof led to, so Nixon’s
President Richard M. Nixon’s administration had to face many international and domestic challenges in the United States between 1968 and 1974, some positive and some negative. His achievements in expanding peaceful relationships with both China and the Soviet Union are contrastingly different with his continuation of the Vietnam War. In the end, Nixon’s scandals and abuse of presidential power caught up to him, and his administration did much to corrode America’s faith in the government.
History will inevitably forgive Richard Nixon. Despite his obvious unlawful mistakes, he made a good president. Until 1968, most Americans saw Richard Nixon as a political has-been, a dour pre-McCarthy hunter of Communists. In 1968, however, Nixon won the Presidency by presenting himself as a healer of divisions. He demonstrated that he had greater ability to reinvent himself than any other modern politician. More than any other figure between the death of Franklin D. Roosevelt and his own resignation in 1974, Nixon was the pivotal postwar President. The architect of detente, he also was the President who ordered secret bombing raids on Laos and Cambodia and then invaded Cambodia. The architect of the conservative
January 1969, Richard Nixon entered the executive office picking up the pieces Lyndon Johnson who had left while the Vietnam War was still in effect. Many Americans had the expectation that Nixon would be the “peaceful president”, visualizing he would put an end to this war in Southeast Asian and bring back home our troops. A policy Nixon redefined was the American role in the world by suggesting to limit the U.S resources and commitments. Therefore, Nixon’s set his efforts to end the war since the withdrawal from Vietnam was not an immediate option. Also, Nixon had his radar on Moscow and China because according to George C. Herring, they felt that they must release the United States from the war in a way that would uphold United States credibility with their friends and foes alike. During Nixon’s term in office, he tries a number of different strategies in his effort to end the war, but to this day, one can see that Nixon only prolonged the war when it could have ended earlier.
As tensions continued to augment profoundly throughout the latter half of the Cold War period, they brought forth a movement from a previous bipolar conflicting course, to one of a more multipolar nature. These tensions were now not only restricted to the Soviet Union and United states, but amongst multiple other nations of the globe. It became a general consensus that a notion of ‘peace’ was sought globally, hence, the emergence of détente. The nature of this idea in the short term conveyed itself to be an act of change for the conflicting nations, however, in the long term it proved to be a blatant continuity, ultimately acting as a ‘mechanism for domestic fortification’ which prompted a more divisive tone. It became apparent that by the prime 1970’s Cold War countries were now seeking a state of relaxation in political and international tension, détente, through measures of diplomacy and negotiation. Actions, influences and treaties such as the Helsinki Final Act of 1975, the establishment of SALT 1, the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972 and the Shanghai Communique of 1972 evidently help reinforce that the concept of détente brought a period focused on lessening the tensions of international relations and ultimately achieve political relation for the future of the Cold War, although the success and impact of this era is abhorred by many historians who have concluded that détente didn’t activate any positive changes to the cold war, and was conclusively a failure.
In 1960’s America was becoming divided at home and struggling to understand the America’s intervention in foreign nations especially South Vietnam. When Nixon took office he wanted to quiet the protests, he wanted to get America out of Vietnam and focus on the falling economy at home. Thus Nixon purposed a period of relaxation with the Soviet Union. “ Nixon and Kissinger hoped that such a relationship, which they deemed détente would lessen the threat of nuclear war, encourage the Soviets to pressure North Vietnam into a peace settlement.” (Gillon p. 1114) “ President Nixon and Henry Kissinger wanted to abandon the costly pursuit of weapons superiority and instead focus on peaceful economic competition.” (Gillon p.1114)