I pledge that I have neither received nor given unauthorized assistance during the completion of this work." –Luke Lydon Cassidy Luke Cassidy History 215 14 March 2014 A POLICY OF HUMAN RIGHTS BASED ON INTERESTS NOT MORALITY Increased civil and economic challenges at home, along with the massive geopolitical fallout of the Vietnam War ushered the United States into the 1970s with a newfound foreign policy outlook. This perspective can be surmised as an outlook of realistic pragmatism in which the US acknowledged the necessity to work with other countries, as opposed to unilaterally shape the world in accordance to America’s interests. This realpolitik strategy was helmed by Henry Kissinger in his role as National Security Advisor under President Nixon and as Secretary of State under President Ford. While Kissinger’s strategy ultimately accomplished America’s exit from the Vietnam War through Vietnamization, decreased US-Soviet …show more content…
His most extreme rhetoric can be seen in his speech to Evangelical Christians 1983 where he highlighted the Soviet’s secularism calling it “totalitarian darkness”. Reagan’s definition of human rights differed from Carter’s as it centered more on political, religious and economic freedoms, which according to him the Soviet “empire” withheld from the peoples of Eastern Europe. To Reagan, the Berlin Wall in particular was a physical symbol of Soviet oppression on human rights. During his administration America enthusiastically funded the Islamist Mujahedeen in Afghanistan. Reagan depicted the Mujahedeen as fighters for human rights who wished to preserve their religious and political freedom from communism. By the mid-1980s as Reagan established a working relationship with Gorbachev he toned down his animosity for the USSR demonstrating that he too used a language of human rights to benefit his own political
The alliance formed between the US and USSR during the second world war was not strong enough to overcome the decades of uneasiness which existed between the two ideologically polar opposite countries. With their German enemy defeated, the two emerging nuclear superpowers no longer had any common ground on which to base a political, economical, or any other type of relationship. Tensions ran high as the USSR sought to expand Soviet influence throughout Europe while the US and other Western European nations made their opposition to such actions well known. The Eastern countries already under Soviet rule yearned for their independence, while the Western countries were willing to go to great lengths to limit Soviet expansion. "Containment of 'world revolution' became the watchword of American foreign policy throughout the 1950s a...
In the history of the United States, foreign policy has caused many disputes over the proper role in international affairs. The views, morals and beliefs of Americans, makes them feel the need to take leadership of the world and help those countries who are in need. The foreign policies of President Eisenhower will eventually lead to the involvement of the United States in the Vietnam War. President Eisenhower’s role in these policies was based on his military-type strategies to safeguard a victory in the Global Cold War. President Eisenhower’s foreign policies led to an effective involvement in the Cold War and enviably the Vietnam War from an American perspective.
On June 12, 1987, former President Ronald Reagan gave one of his famous speeches, “Remarks at the Brandenburg Gate.” On a superficial level, Reagan uses the speech to petition to the Soviet Union for peace, nuclear and chemical arms reduction, and the demolition of the Berlin Wall. He also highlights the progress and prosperity that have arisen in the western world since the division between communism and democracy was established. Beyond the surface, Reagan subtly disparages communism while simultaneously building up democracy. He emphasizes the importance of freedom, liberty, free trade, and other democratic ideals and the positive effects the western world has experienced because of them. Above all else, Reagan uses the speech to inspire
During the Cold War, the United States engaged in many aggressive policies both at home and abroad, in which to fight communism and the spread of communist ideas. Faced with a new challenge and new global responsibilities, the U.S. needed to retain what it had fought so strongly for in World War II. It needed to contain the communist ideas pouring from the Soviet Union while preventing communist influence at home, without triggering World War III. With the policies of containment, McCarthyism, and brinkmanship, the United States hoped to effectively stop the spread of communism and their newest threat, the Soviet Union. After the war, the United States and the Soviet Union had very different ideas on how to rebuild.
On January 20, 1969, Richard Milhouse Nixon became the 37th president of the United States and faced great challenges at home and on the world front . Richard Nixon selected Henry Kissinger to be his assistant for National Security Affairs. Under their control for the next 6 years, they oversaw the formation of détente and the creation of Triangular Diplomacy. The Nixon-Kissinger strategy in approaching the Soviet Union was full of contradictions and risks. One of the most severe and most notable risks was the potential preemptive nuclear strike that the Soviets were threatening to take against China; an attempt by the Soviets to bully the Chinese into negotiating the Sino-Soviet border. Becoming involved in the Soviet affairs was very dangerous, because as Kissinger observed, the balance of power due to missile strength was shifting from the United States holding the upper hand to that of the Soviets being in control . Kissinger, upon realization of this fact, ...
After a few years since the publication of the “X” article, ‘containment’, the term that was coined by Keenan, became a key word to describe the U.S. foreign policy in overcoming Soviet threats. Yet, Keenan criticized Truman’s containment policy as ‘too universalistic’ in that it placed the U.S. in an exhausting commitment to block every Soviet expansion to free countries (Keenan, 1967). In fact, the containment policy was influencing the U.S. involvement in different confrontation from Germany to Vietnam.
His extreme effectiveness feeds from decision-making ability that turned the country away from the negative and instable foreign policy of Carter and back to support winning the Cold War and promoting the strength of the US. In the 1970s, because Carter allowed Communism to gain military and territorial advantages, and failed to impose American hegemon and his own power as President. Reagan took office in 1981, “he was determined to rebuild that power, regain for the United States the capability to wage war successfully against the Soviets, to act with impunity against Soviet Third World clients, and to regain its status as the world’s dominant military force.” Reagan handled the Iran hostage Crisis within the hour of assuming the Presidency. Simultaneously, doing what was necessary to free Americans, and to use his power as President to go outside the constitution and congress and secure funding for the Contras to overthrown the Sandinistas in Nicaragua and restore the nation to a pro-American government. Unlike Carter Reagan wanted to make it clear he only cared about protecting American security, and that human rights could be an after
The Soviets could clearly see that when Reagan. said he wanted a "margin of safety." He meant that the United States should be. superior to the Russians. Moscow would not let this happen. They wanted equality.5 Reagan also believed in military power and respect for America abroad.
Henry A. Kissinger, perhaps one of the most powerful American diplomats of the twentieth century, remarked that in his time, “[George F. Kennan] came as close to authoring the diplomatic doctrine of his era as any diplomat in our history” (Kissinger, 1979: 135). It is interesting to note, however, Kissinger’s appraisal of the doctrine as being a success in his time—not all time, and perhaps not even in Kissinger’s time. Despite the relative absence of scholarly consensus surrounding the body of thought that has become Kennan’s strategic canon, few could plausibly deny that Kennan had a profound impact on the exercise of American foreign policy during the Cold War.
Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” (Reagan 361) This line, while so simple, is probably the most famous from the whole speech and arguably one of Ronald Reagan 's most famous and recognizable lines ever. It sends a glaringly strong message that the United States and entire free world wants to bring Germany together not just for its own personal interests but because it genuinely cares about the state of the country. This short concise statement also shows that the president means business and that he is willing to do anything in his power to help the German people should Gorbachev accept his offer. He goes on to state that the United States is striving for peace and although it can not permit the spreading of communism, it does seek for all the people to see an increase in the standard of living and assure both sides security by demilitarizing and disarming both sides wherever
The Soviet Union began to view the United States as a threat to communism, and the United States began to view the Soviet Union as a threat to democracy. On March 12, 1947, Truman gave a speech in which he argued that the United States should support nations trying to resist Soviet imperialism. Truman and his advisors created a foreign policy that consisted of giving reconstruction aid to Europe, and preventing Russian expansionism. These foreign policy decisions, as well as his involvement in the usage of the atomic bomb, raise the question of whether or not the Cold War can be blamed on Truman. Supporting the view that Truman was responsible for the Cold War, Arnold Offner argues that Truman’s parochialism and nationalism caused him to make contrary foreign policy decisions without regard to other nations, which caused the intense standoff between the Soviet Union and America that became the Cold War (Offner 291)....
Reagan’s ethos was created throughout his two terms but solidified in his second and final one. Reagan presents his ethos throughout his rhetoric by stating facts with authority and also in a way that made him credible to the audience. One of the parts in his speech is headlined with a cold and awakening fact directed at the Soviet Union. In a 1956 speech given by Soviet Union leader Nikita Khrushchev, the statement “We will bury you,” was aimed at Western ambassadors who stood for freedom. In Reagan’s speech at the Brandenburg Gate, he specifically calls out the previously stated notion that the Soviets would essentially, “bury the free world.” Reagan profoundly proclaims this: “In the 1950s, Khrushchev predicted: "We will bury you." But in the West today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and well-being unprecedented in all human history. In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind--too little food. Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself. After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace. Freedom is the victor.” The great appeal this presented to the
President Nixon and Henry Kissinger both believed that the US could ensure its national security and promote its interests by establishing stronger diplomatic relations with the big powers and through that control and influence their decision-making. The US wanted to be the center of this multipolar world, but this could only be achieved by downplaying the importance of ideology towards the Soviet Union and to open up towards China, “(…) which the United States had...
Richard Nixon and his national security advisor, Henry Kissinger, were fully aware of the reality and “waged” détente vigorously to gain advantage in the global competition with the Soviet Union. They did not acknowledge the fact, however, and could not control conflicting public reaction when the Soviet leaders desired to do the same, both by intervening in the third world and by keeping up the arms race. Blame was associated not only to the Soviet leaders but also to the policy of détente, especially in the Ford and Carter
(1993), The Cambridge History of American Foreign Relations, Volume Four, America in the Age of Soviet Power, 1945 – 1991, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press · Froman, M.B. (1991) The Development of the Détente, Coming to Terms, London, Macmillan Academic and Professional LTD · Kent, J. and Young, J.W. (2004) International Relations Since 1945, Oxford, Oxford University Press · www.oed.com (Oxford English Dictionary online)