Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Treatment of Jewish People in Nazi Germany 1933-1945
Treatment of Jewish People in Nazi Germany 1933-1945
Treatment of Jewish People in Nazi Germany 1933-1945
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Treatment of Jewish People in Nazi Germany 1933-1945
There are two political figures who have played important roles in U.S. international politics; they are Henry Kissinger and Madeleine Albright. They both seem to have similar backgrounds and they both went through equivalent circumstances.
One important and controversial political figure that has been the author of many political and international relations books is Henry Kissinger. He was born in Germany in 1923. He was a Jewish child who lived fifteen years of his life in his home town; however, during the 1930s, a growing Nazi Germany became an unsafe place for him and his family. Therefore, he had to fly to London and then New York City. He continued his studies in the United States, but when the U.S. entered World War II, he “was drafted
…show more content…
The national interest thus replaced the medieval notion of a universal morality that guided all men and nations. The second key concept is the balance of power an international order in which no nation is dominant. Each nation maintains its independence by aligning itself, or opposing, other nations according to its calculation of the imperatives of power. (“Kissingers…” 1)
That is why when Kissinger came into office and “faced significant challenges on both the domestic and international affairs” (Cadwell 633). He “thought that American foreign policy should be determined by American national interests rather than ideals or ideology” (Cadwell
…show more content…
During the 1970s, Kissinger along with President Nixon sought to improve relations with two of the United States communist opponents China and the Soviet Union. “In 1971, Kissinger made two secret trips to the People’s Republic of China” (“Henry…” 1). These trips were done with the final objective to ease President Nixon’s visit in 1972. These were not the first attempts to reestablish the political relationship with China. However, those earlier attempts were a total failure. Besides, the invasion of Cambodia made it difficult to sustain a dialogue with China. The main objectives were to “open up another front in the Cold War against the Soviet Union” and contain a potential nuclear threat (Burr 1). Kissinger tried to approach China through Pakistan’s ruler, Yahya Khan’s, through the Romanian government, and an old friend in Paris’ Chinese embassy. The moment finally came when Zhou Enlai expressed through a third connection his interest in meeting with President Nixon. However, U.S. acknowledgement of Taiwan complicated the reestablishment of U.S.-China relationships. Kissinger tried his best to stay neutral in that matter, which made Zhou declared that he felt “optimistic about Sino-American rapprochement” (Burr 1). Nonetheless, the relationships stayed standby until General Form became president. It was not until 1979 that Kissinger “completed
For the first time in the history of cross-strait tensions, there was a real threat that Washington and the CCP could engage in war. Washington’s involvement would come in because of the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act. The implication of this Act is that the U.S. promised to protect Taiwan in the event of an attack. Therefore, if the CCP decided to engage in a war with Taiwan, the United States would have no choice but to support Taiwan.
All of 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 democracy in Americans, makes them feel the need to take leadership of the world and help those countries whom are in need. The foreign policies of President Eisenhower will eventually led to the involvement of the United States in the Vietnam War. President Eisenhower’s role with these policies were 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. President Eisenhower’s foreign policies when implemented would facilitate the goal of containing communism, and also
Of the 44 Presidents of the United States, Ulysses S. Grant and Dwight D. Eisenhower had the most in common. Both graduated from West Point and became Presidents. They had been commanding generals of undefeated armies before entering politics. They had no political experiences or even held lower public office. They were Republican presidents who served two consecutive complete four-year terms. Their heroism in the wars settled the foundation of their political career.
...es when it comes to implementing controversial foreign policy decisions that directly affect Americans and those in different countries. The main aspect of the affair that greatly influences the United States’ government is ensuring that its past imperialistic motives do not become an integral part of American affairs once again.
Woodrow Wilson was the 28th President of the United States and held the office from 1913-1921. He became known as “the Crusader” due to his foreign policy theory that America should be a beacon of liberty and aggressively pursue the spread of democracy throughout the world. His policy would enable America to prosper economically and develop an international security community through the promotion of democracy in other nations. While former Secretary of State Kissinger writes in his book Diplomacy that 20th century American foreign policy has been driven by Wilsonian idealism, an analysis of 21st century US foreign policy reveals that, in fact, US foreign policy has been influenced by ideals that can be characterized as Hamiltonian, Jeffersonian, and Jacksonian as well.
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 be...
One must wonder; what was Kissinger’s motive? Being pushed by “his boss” President Nixon to prevent communism in Chile at all costs is apparent, as is his friendly relationship with Pinochet that he developed. “I want to see our relations and friendship improve,” Kissinger states in a memoir to Pinochet during his trip to Chile that was intended to speak about human rights concerns (Kornbluh 1999; page 5). But what was truly the underlining motivation that caused Kissinger to risk his job and reputation to keep Pinochet in power? Could it simply be a lack of sympathy? Or was Kissinger just overly fanatical about stopping the spread of Communism?
Having showed his stamina in the political arena for eight more years he staged a comeback into politics that set in motion, some of the greatest political ideas to date. With help from Henry Kissinger he started a movement into foreign policy that would lead to the ending of an awful conflict in Vietnam.
(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)
In foreign policy, decision making is guided by different a leader that is from presidents, cabinets, parliaments and groups such as communist party of Soviet Union and the standing committee of the communist party of china and Central Intelligence Agency of USA. One cannot run away from the fact that a leader’s personality can affect foreign policy. Maoz and Shayer believe that one cannot underrate or ignore the role of personality in decision making as it plays a huge role. By examining ones foreign policy, we can understand foreign policy better (Jensen, 1982). If a leader is aggressive then there are certain traits he will exhibit such as paranoia, manipulation, thirst for power high intensity of nationalism, (Hermann, 1980). Hitler was one leader who led to world war when he challenged the treaty of Versailles by adopting an aggressive foreign policy. The opposite is true for a mild leader for example George Washington who told Americans to avoid entrapping alliances.
78, no. 1, pp. 137-146. 5 (3), 27-45, http://www.politicalperspectives.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Sino-US-relations1.pdf 9. Wang, Hui, “U.S.-China: Bonds and Tensions”, RAND Corporation, 257-288, n.d., http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1300/MR1300.ch12.pdf 10. Yuan, Jing- Dong, “Sino-US Military Relations Since Tiananmen: Restoration, Progress, and Pitfalls”, Spring 2003, http://strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/parameters/articles/03spring/yuan.pdf 11. Yan, Xuetong. "
The first paradigm of international relations is the theory of Realism. Realism is focused on ideas of self-interest and the balance of power. Realism is also divided into two categories, classical realism and neo-realism. Famous political theorist, Hans Morgenthau was a classical realist who believed that national interest was based on three elements, balance of power, military force, and self interest (Kleinberg 2010, 32). He uses four levels of analysis to evaluate the power of a state. The first is that power and influence are not always the same thing. Influence means the ability to affect the decision of those who have the power to control outcomes and power is the ability to determine outcomes. An example of influence and power would be the UN’s ability to influence the actions of states within the UN but the state itself has the power to determine how they act. Morgenthau goes on to his next level of analysis in which he explains the difference in force and power in the international realm. Force is physical violence, the use of military power but power is so much more than that. A powerful state can control the actions of another state with the threat of force but not actually need to physical force. He believed that the ability to have power over another state simply with the threat of force was likely to be the most important element in analysis the power of as state (Kleinberg 2010, 33-34).
This essay will describe the characteristics of the modern nation-state, explain how the United States fits the criteria of and functions as a modern nation-state, discuss the European Union as a transnational entity, analyze how nation-states and transnational entities engage on foreign policy to achieve their interests, and the consequences of this interaction for international politics.
The international system is an anarchical system which means that, unlike the states, there is no over ruling, governing body that enforces laws and regulations that all states must abide by. The International System in today’s society has become highly influential from a number of significant factors. Some of these factors that will be discussed are Power held by the state, major Wars that have been fought out in recent history and international organisations such as the U.N, NATO and the W.T.O. Each of these factors, have a great influence over the international system and as a result, the states abilities to “freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development”.
The balance of power is closer with first great debate. The realists also diverge on some issues. So-called offensive Realists maintain that, in order to ensure survival, States will seek to maximize their power relative to others (Mearsheimer 2001). If rival countries possess enough power to threaten a State, it can never be safe. The hegemony is thus the best strategy for a country to pursue, if it can. Defensive Realists, in contrast, believe that domination is an unwise strategy for State survival. They note that seeking hegemony may bring a State into dangerous conflicts with its peers. Instead, defensive Realists emphasize the stabi...