For more information
Call 1-800-351-0222

"DIPLOMACY" (HENRY KISSINGER).
  Term Paper ID:25060 		Get This Paper Free! or
Essay Subject:
Critical review of work on history of global diplomacy & critique of new world order.... More...
5 Pages / 1125 Words
1 sources, 14 Citations, TURABIAN Format
$20.00

More Papers on This Topic


Paper Abstract:
Critical review of work on history of global diplomacy & critique of new world order.

Paper Introduction:
The purpose of this research is to examine Diplomacy by Henry A. Kissinger. The plan of the research will be to set forth the theme of and pattern of ideas in the book and then to discuss the style, emphasis, sources, organization, bias of the author, and other features that comprise the means by which the theme is elaborated, as well as Kissinger's career--all with a view toward providing an evaluation of the contributions it makes to an understanding of the subjects it undertakes. The theme of Diplomacy has a double perspective, one historical and the other critical. From one point of view, it is a historical survey of some three hundred years worth of international relations in and among the nation-states of Europe and the United States. The survey seems partly meant to show that certain problems now being faced by the West have roots as far back as the b

Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.


Toexplain the content of policy analysis, i.e., to speak to the professionalformulator and technical implementer of policy, belongs to a differentexercise. [3]Ibid., 698. As National Security Council advisor and as secretary ofstate for Nixon and Ford and as formal and informal adviser to subsequentpresidents, Kissinger seems well positioned to provide an informedperspective of policy formulation and praxis. Indeed, Kissinger emphasizeshis role in what he characterizes as Nixon's strategic extrication of theU.S. [11]Ibid., 832. Moralism is self-defeating of American geopoliticalgoals when measured against such modern practitioners of self-interestedRealpolitik as Stalin and Hitler. The phenomenon of fractious postcolonial nation-states inAfrica and Yugoslavia, meanwhile, is at issue mainly to illustrate thenecessity for America to define its vital interest before embarking onreform or intervention.[14] Kissinger's purpose appears to be to make acase for a particular agenda of policy formulation and goal setting. The plan of the research will be to set forth the theme of andpattern of ideas in the book and then to discuss the style, emphasis,sources, organization, bias of the author, and other features that comprisethe means by which the theme is elaborated, as well as Kissinger's career--all with a view toward providing an evaluation of the contributions itmakes to an understanding of the subjects it undertakes. [12]Ibid., 833. from influencing outcomes.Kissinger cites the shifting geopolitical behavior in Asia and inparticular the emergence of China, which has historically and unambiguouslypursued a policy of national interest, in this regard.[1 ] Similarly, evenas Kissinger acknowledges the benefit of liberalization of the Sovietsystem, he urges the U.S. The survey seems partlymeant to show that certain problems now being faced by the West have rootsas far back as the beginning of nation-state development, which followedthe era of the medieval world view and feudal social structures,intersected with the period of divine-right monarchy, and ran parallel withthe end of tension between religious hegemony and religious warfare inEurope.[1] But Diplomacy does not begin the historical account, startingwith the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, which ended the Thirty Years War(i.e., the last great religious war), until the third chapter. [14]Ibid., 812. Diplomacy. To the degree the objectives of the new world orderderive from moralistic arguments based on democratic values, Kissinger isunenthusiastic about them because they have the potential to cloud the"geopolitical analysis" necessary to find a way through "the maze of newcomplexities" in a post-Cold War world.[5] On the other hand, Kissingercredits Ronald Reagan's advocacy of exporting democracy around the worldand his particular kind of foreign-policy idealism, which he favorablycharacterizes as ideological and "relentlessly confrontational,"[6] withbringing about the collapse of the Soviet empire. goals are measured against Kissinger's Cold War nemesis,international ideological communism. But moral equivalence becomes importantindeed when U.S. BibliographyKissinger, Henry A. cannot control the emergingnew world order, it should pursue a balance-of-power strategy based onRealpolitik geopolitical analyses and economic and security alliances[9]that are firmly and formally in place before changing events and conditionsdeteriorate in ways that might prevent the U.S. From one point of view, it is a historical survey ofsome three hundred years worth of international relations in and among thenation-states of Europe and the United States. It is as if Diplomacy offers Kissinger theopportunity to make amends with a politician sharing socially conservativeviews by making rather more of Reagan's diplomatic acumen, and rather lessof the well-documented, though protracted economic and social implosion ofthe inherently weak Soviet system from within,[8] for which the U.S. diplomatic behaviorafter World War II; during the Cold War (including both Korea, where theoperative word was containment, and Vietnam, where the operative wordeventually became extrication); at the time of the collapse of communism;and in the post-Cold War period of the New World Order, as articulated indifferent ways by George Bush and Bill Clinton. This narrative design enables Kissinger to detail his own role inforeign relations. The purpose of this research is to examine Diplomacy by Henry A.Kissinger. It is difficult to see the distinction between Wilsonian idealism,which Kissinger appears to believe has been as destructive as formative ofAmerican foreign policy in the twentieth century, and the ideologicalidealism of Reagan, particularly in view of Kissinger's own publishedcomment about Reagan's being "unintellectual"[7] though influential inWashington and beyond. cannotlogically claim much credit. [2]Ibid., 54. [13]Ibid., 834. But Kissinger's view of moral equivalence at the geopoliticallevel is variable. Thissuggests that he is speaking to the well-educated general reader andperhaps domestic policy analyst, advisor, journalist, and politician. to influence events so as to check Russiannationalistic imperialism. from Vietnam based on (previous administrations') policy analysis of"ill-defined causes."[3] In particular, Kissinger appears to take somecredit for helping shape two of Nixon's foreign policy ideas: first, atransformation of objectives characterized by (Wilsonian) idealism intoobjectives characterized by national interest, also characterized as"realism" and Realpolitik and second, a "structure of peace" by way of abalance of power, specifically a "triangular" relationship between theworld's three big nuclear powers, the U.S., U.S.S.R., and P.R.C.[4]Important in this regard is that Nixon (and Kissinger) formulated this viewof America's permanent status as a superpower in the period of decliningAmerican prestige owing to Vietnam. [7]Ibid., 765. Meanwhile, his view is that since the U.S. [5]Ibid., 812. [9]Ibid., 827-8. Indeed, the book takes particularnote of the role of Wilsonian idealism, which emerged at Versailles, on theentire structure of U.S. Thus it isdifficult to see how Kissinger's vision of the geopolitical future is,ultimately, any clearer or sharper, or any less utopian than that of (say)Clinton or Wilson. [8]Ibid., 566-7, et passim. [1 ]Ibid., 83 . foreign-policy leadership: "For whenever Americanhas faced the task of constructing a new world order, it has returned inone way or another to Woodrow Wilson's precepts."[2] The heart of the bookdevelops around America's leadership task in this regard. While acknowledging that Realpolitik "is not acure-all"[11] and that balance-of-power diplomacy by itself may not besufficient to every task, he also complains that neither Bush nor Clintonsufficiently appreciated such an approach. [4]Ibid., 731-4. Once thehistorical survey is completed, it concentrates on U.S. One need not make a case for suchmoralistic political stances as communism, ethnic self-determination (atrap that Wilsonian idealism fell into), or hegemonic Islam to see thatKissinger is, ultimately, arguing the moral weight of democracy, butsupporting it by way of analysis and Realpolitik action. assumed a place in theleadership of international relations. The fact that Diplomacy compresses into one current volume ahistorical review of foreign relations allows Kissinger to prepare afoundation for his case that the so-called new world order contains littlethat is really new. Equilibrium, a product ofsuccessful balance-of-power diplomacy, is in Kissinger's view "afundamental precondition for the pursuit of [America's] historicgoals."[12] Kissinger's undertaking in Diplomacy reaches greatest meaning when itconnects the fractious history of Europe with the complex and sometimesdangerous relationships among modern superpowers. His "realist" critique ofidealism and moralism as driving diplomacy seems well-founded in manyrespects. That isbecause of the second perspective of the book, which is to give an accountand critique of transformations of modern (i.e., twentieth-century)American foreign policy from the time that the U.S. Meanwhile, Kissinger longs for a balance-of-power world in which, asin the post-Napoleonic age of Metternich, revolution and instability becomedifficult to achieve because of a cohesion of shared (democratic)values.[13] This longing must be set beside the incidental treatment of thecomplex impact of what could be called the international Islamicrevolution. [6]Ibid., 732. Kissinger, Diplomacy (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994),83ff. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994.----------------------- [1]Henry A. The theme of Diplomacy has a double perspective, one historical andthe other critical.

If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:

Search for:

or

We can write a Custom Essay just for you.


Browse Essays by Subject