Foreign Secretary Level Talks : India 's Prime Minister

In 1972, President Richard Nixon was quoted as stating that his visit to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) “changed the world…to build a bridge across sixteen thousand miles and twenty-two years of hostilities.” By meeting with Chairman Mao Zedong in Beijing, Nixon took groundbreaking first steps to opening relations and formally recognizing the People’s Republic of China. The history of the aforementioned hostilities between the United States and the PRC dates back to the Chinese Communist Party’s takeover of mainland China following its civil war in the

Hamid shows Changes perception of individuality. People like Changes suffered a lot in America and got interest to know native identity. Native culture and identity is awesome for every individual. Changes worries that even after all the sacrifices and services of Pakistanis has never treated Pakistan as ally or friend. There is probability that Americans might have encouraged Indians to envy with Pakistanis. Hamid painfully conveys that Americans never treat non- European Counties as their friends and they treat like tissue papers.

To achieve this diplomatic strength, Richard Nixon first turned toward China. For decades, China had posed unique opportunities to America. However, these opportunities shriveled when in 1949, Mao Zedong established the People’s Republic of China, a communist republic aligned more with the USSR than with the United States. Given America’s animosity towards the Soviet Union, this animosity extended itself to the People’s Republic of China and to Mao Zedong. Just over twenty years later, though, even though Mao still held considerable power, the USSR and China began to drift apart.

A meeting between Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian President Anwar el-Sadat about issues occurring in the Middle East, possible solutions & conflicts, and the creation of the Camp David Accords resulted in a peace treaty. This peace treaty has put an end to the war between Israel and Egypt, promised the withdrawal of Egyptian land, as well as an open conversations about future relations between the two countries. “As we discussed these and other emotional issues, I soon realized that Begin and Sadat were personally incompatible. The sometimes petty, sometime heated arguments that arose between them when we were all in the same room convinced me it would be better if each of them spoke to me as the mediator instead of directly to the other.” Although it seemed difficult to come to a conclusion in the process, the Camp David Accords showed as a success in view of the fact that it created peace between the United States and the Middle East. “Looking back on all of the issues or events that took place, including the Camp David Accords, there is a continuity that is both discouraging and also offers some modicum of hope.” It created hope for those who were worried about the Middle East of even Jimmy Carter himself. We understand the political pitfalls involved, but the situation is getting into an extreme state, and I’m concerned that Sadat might precipitate a conflict in October, as he has

Nixon’s China policy was effective in advancing U.S. interests because he was able to overlook vast differences in ideology and values to pursue common interests (Bader1), such as containing Soviet expansion. Nixon himself, “had made his name as a dogged and vociferous anti-communist” (Macmillan2), however by traveling into the “the very heart of Communism” (2) Nixon could establish

It is no longer appropriate to say, “China is quickly emerging as a global superpower.” The fact is China is just that. Realizing this the United States of America has attempted to once again turn its focus eastward. Continuing problems at home and in the Middle East however have made doing so difficult. Additionally more and more frequently attempts at influencing the ongoing narrative in the Asia- Pacific region have been rebuffed. Even allies have found strength in the emergence of a system that fails to conform to previously prescribed methods and ideals. This leads to a fundamental question America must answer quickly. Has the growing hypocrisy of idealistic political rhetoric versus actual foreign policy finally undermined American credibility with developing nations, or for the purposes of this paper more specifically China? The answer is yes.

Cold War politics went beyond direct relations with the Soviet Union in their impact on the course of American history. With China, Nixon sought a similar mutual agreement to peaceful resolution as that set down with the Soviet Union. In addition, the administration saw the benefit of scientific cooperation and bilateral trade as potential areas for expansion of relations and mutual benefit. This statement is largely on behalf of military peace between powerful nations, but it goes beyond that to include an acknowledgment of economic opportunity from increased contact. This is an introduction to the potential for global trade to be an important part of foreign affairs in the

__Pakistan__ - The British left India, and India and Pakistan became two separate countries. This separation will become very beneficial for the

This will not only be beneficial for US-Pakistan relations but will also safeguard its strategic interests in the region in the long-term. Henry Kissinger in his book, “White House

Many believe it is naïve to think this agreement can result in a more unified world, as having optimism seems redundant given the turbulence of the middle east: ISIS is on the rise, Libya is at war with itself, Israel and Palestine’s conflict is crippling, the Arab spring is in scraps, and Syria’s civil war has killed an estimated hundred thousand.

Familiar faces will forge new alliances to bolster their strategic chances at survival, while new characters will emerge to challenge the balance of power in the east, west, north and

Before Nixon decided to pursue normalization with China in 1971, the U.S. arms sales policy towards Taiwan was stable because of the Vietnam War effort and global containment strategy. U.S. pulled Taiwan into its global policy without much debate, given that choice for Taiwan was indeed limited and its economic strength as well as defense capability were relatively weak. With US recognition of the PRC a fait accompli, how to make the new relationships with China and Taiwan had engaged lawyers and diplomats beginning in 1972 and especially during 1978. From late 1970s on, the triangular struggle among U.S.-RPC-ROC outlined principal U.S. arms sales policy to Taiwan. This article briefly examines U.S. arms sales to Taiwan from late 1970s to

The events that have taken place over the past couple of centuries, and more so the past decade, have monumentally impacted the relationship between the United States and China for better and for worse. Today, China and the U.S. have evolved into two of the most elite superpowers in the world, and they classify as some of the most prominent leaders in economics, military, technology, and universal innovation. Currently, the United States is just weeks away from electing their next president, cyber-attacks are being investigated exponentially, and the South China Sea Debate continues to be disputed. The outcomes of all these events will undoubtedly affect the relationship between China and the United States for the next 10 years.

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has become more integrated and willing to cooperate within the global political and economic systems than ever in its history. However, there is growing apprehension in the Asia-Pacific region and the U.S. in regards to the consequences of rising in economic and military power in China. Descriptions about Chinese diplomacy in the policy and scholarly are less positive lately concerning China’s obedience to regional and international rules. There was little debate in the U.S. and elsewhere in regards to whether China was or was not part “the international community.” Scholars and experts in the early 1990s have contended

Mani Shankar Aiyar has an image of a maverick politician who has constantly defied the party line. But this time he has transgressed all limits of established diplomatic norms. Aiyar suggested during a Pakistani TV channel chat show that talks between India and Pakistan can only move forward