Exploring The Relationship Between Realpolitik And Ideological Politics

He tried his best not to lose the war because he does not want American war to be the loser. The United States troops were completely pulled back from Vietnam before the finish of March of 1973, yet America continued battling in Cambodia. North Vietnam did not respond to US notices and before the year 's over Nixon stayed weak after Watergate. In his article, the author said that Nixon tried to protect the Thieu administration in South Vietnam and let South Vietnam on the safe side because he needed the Thieu government to be secure. North Vietnam needed to have a unity but South Vietnam strived to be a free country. Nixon 's mission was to help and support the nations that are US partners such as South Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos, but other nations would need to shield themselves from the communism. When Nixon attempted to stay faithful to his obligation to the Thieu government in South Vietnam, Secretary of State Dr. Henry Kissinger needed to proceed onward to different United State interests gradually. The purpose for these spending is to secure the Thieu government in South Vietnam. In his article, the author said that Nixon’s administration shows how much Kissinger feel afraid from the Negotiations that are full of twists. Despite the hostility between United State and North Vietnam, Nixon still threatening them that he doesn’t want to pay the amount if they do not want to adhere to the guarantee of the understanding, but when Richard Nixon resigned, the

Realism is an international relations theory with a lineage that dates back to thinkers such as Thomas Hobbes, Machiavelli and Thucydides (Forde). Because the conditions for international relations are inherently anarchic, with neither hierarchical power nor expectation of reciprocity to enforce cooperation between actors, realists insist that the sole responsibility of the state must simply be self-preservation. As foreign policy specialist George Kennan wrote, “other criteria, sadder, more limited, more practical must be allowed to prevail” in spite of morality.

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.

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)

The policies enacted by American leaders were very effective in Europe, but failed to help Asia. In 1945, much of China had been corrupted by communism rule. Under the command of Mao Zidong and funding provided by the Soviet Union, Mao was able to take over China easily and corrupt much of its neighbor, Asia (Document F). Failing to prevent the corruption of Asia, the United States began to combat the oncoming fear and concern at

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.

Playing the China card was a new way Nixon was able to integrate his idea of linkage politics. His theory was that because China was afraid of the Soviets, they may purse relations with the United States, which in return, would help control the USSR (PBS Nixon

Prior to Communism in China, it was known to be a chaotic country on the brink of self-destruction. With the emergence of the party leader Mao Zedong, came a new hope, which filled its inhabitants with the belief that China would return to its former historical greatness. American and Chinese relations before 1971 were in simple terms described as “uneasy”, due to the American, Soviet Cold War. It was not until President Richard Nixon visited China and realized the high value of having China as a ally that relations between the two powers began to become positive. Unknown at the time, it is assumed in the book Chinese Lessons written by John Pomfret, that the relationships he formed with the people he met in China would change his outlook on life and Communist China forever.

Realism and Liberalism are two extremely prominent theories of international relations. These doctrines exhibit sagacious perceptions about war, foreign affairs and domestic relations. The fundamental principles of protocol in which we rely upon aren’t always apprehensive (Karle, Warren, 2003). By interpreting the data one could fathom these ideas. The assessment of these faculties wield noteworthy dominance about the concepts of international affairs. In analyzing this data, you will comprehend the variant relationship between Realism and Liberalism.

Almost all parts of the world did not expect such meeting to happen and some did not want this friendly meeting to happen. In fact it came as complete shock to most of Soviet leadership (MacMillan, 290) Since the Soviets was not in good relations with China Soviets were irritated that this impossible meeting took place to improve the Sino-American relationship. The U.S. and China had been enemies for too long and also the war in Vietnam remained to keep them apart. (MacMillan, 289)The KGB, the Soviet secret police, had planned a campaign of disinformation to keep Americans and Chinese apart. (MacMillan, 289)

Realism has dominated international relations theory since emerging in the 1930’s. The era of state conflict lasting from the 1930’s to the end of the cold war in 1947, proved the perfect hostile environment to fit the largely pessimistic view of world politics. While many aspects of realism are still alive in International Relations today; including the dominant presence of states, intrinsic of war and the decentralised government. However, realism only reaches so far in explaining and creating a structure for international relations. Whilst the strengths of the theory lie in its pragmatic approach to power politics and conflict. However, the realist view is weakened by changes in the way that conflict is fought, the ineffectiveness of the balance of power model and the increasing global and interconnected world. Thus, using realism as a structure to explain international relations today is to some extent, a theory of the past.

In this essay the conservative theories of Realism and Liberalism will be compared and contrasted in connection with the study of International Relations. Post World War I International Relations was established as a formal discipline with the eructation of the Woodrow Wilson Chair at the University of Wales, given the worldwide urgency to create international order and stability in the wake of the war. Realist in International Relations view human nature and the states behaviour practically and truthfully, adopting a matter-of-fact attitude instead of visualising how the political institutions ought to function. Liberalists

Classical realist theory is based upon the idea that human nature is inherently bad and selfish, the international system is anarchic, and the state is the most important actor in international affairs. Basing policy decisions on human nature, the state looks to maximize it’s power and security within its geographic location. Realist theory sees all conflict deriving from power struggles between states, though it is not about fostering wars; rather the opposite.

Henry Kissinger work for as National Security Adviser and Secretary of State under Presidents Nixon and Ford. He was a key figure in uttering U.S. foreign policy during the Cold War, and remains one of the leading authorities on international relations and diplomacy.

Realism focuses on the balance of power and how it impacts of actions of state actors within the international political system. Morgenthau said that, “The aspirations for power on the part of several nations, each trying to either maintain or overthrow the status quo, leads of necessity to a configuration that is called the balance of power and to policies that aim at preserving it” (Morgenthau 1967,131). He goes on by explain that not only is the balance of power and the policies that protect it inevitable but also that they are essential for