“Where you stand is where you sit” refers to the position you take on a matter. Your position depends on what matters to you. Where you “stand” is your ideals, your influences, and your situation and where you “sit” refers to your opinion on a matter based on where you are “standing”. This quote is in reference to decision-making in organizations and can be applied to foreign policy decisions of states. “Where you stand is where you sit” can be understood in terms of the Bureaucratic Politics Model, which focuses on crisis decision making within an executive branch of government.
The Bureaucratic Politics Model “zeros on the inner circle of decision-makers,” Levy and Thompson argue that this model, “assumes that if we want to understand
…show more content…
In their essay, The Cuban Missile Crisis Revisited, Blight, Nye, and Welch describe a time when Bureaucratic Politics nearly lead to war but ultimately did not. The Cuban Mussel Crisis was, they argue, an important lesson that we should be wary to forget. The article explores the “small-group politics,” and the different groups that were influential, such as the Hawks, Owls, and Doves. Each group had different opinions or seats, and different preconceived ideas on Cuba based on where they stood. The Hawks wanted to invade and be more forceful with the Cubans, which tended to be groups that would benefit from going to war. The Owls. “prefer[red] the quarantine, a (relatively mild) use of military force; this seemed to its proponents to allow for flexible movement—should conditions require it—toward the hawkish or dovish options.” The doves, of course, preferred a more peaceful tactic, surprisingly the Secretary of Defense, McNamara, was a dove. “The department of Defense tends to more hawkish,” but perhaps with the threat of a nuclear war the Defense department was cautious. Kennedy also brought in other member for advice. For example Kennedy asked for the advice of his brother, Robert Kennedy to try and make a decision. Each of these organizations and people had their own onions; they caused satisficing, and stoke-piping and it was clear that President Kennedy was unsure of
While introducing the sociology of C. Wright Mills, Frank W. Elwell (2006) explained Mill’s conception of a power elite that dominates modern industrial societies, like America. According to Mills, present day societies host a small and unified group, called the power elite. The power elite holds enormous power because they are in control of the major bureaucratic organizations that currently dominate modern societies (p. 10). Mill’s perspective strongly emphasized the ongoing rationalization process and how this was related to the intensifying bureaucratization process that has shaped social structures and social organizations. The processes of rationalization and bureaucratization have deeply affected many societies and Mills argued that these processes posed a threat to the representative character of America.
Therefore, establishing anti-Bolshevism in the United States was Robert F. Kelley’s mission. Kelley an Irish Catholic trained by Russian refugees ran the Eastern European Affairs division in the State Department (Leffler, The Specter of Communism, 19). Kelley’s intense dislike for the Bolsheviks demands that his aides join actively in his views. One of his service officers is George F. Kennan who joins in the close observation of Bolshevik destabilizing and expansionist activities that cause unrest in Mexico, Nicaragua, Cuba, Spain and Greece (Leffler, The Specter of Communism, 19). Was Kennan’s containment strategy thinking set off with Kelley’s training? Was Kennan’s awareness of the ongoing Russian Communist activities the basis for his ideas? History proves that George Kennan’s ideas on containment were the basis of NSC-68 and...
This investigation will be an evaluation of President Kennedy’s Executive Committee and the repercussions of the decisions made during the thirteen days of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Tape recordings and files had been deemed classified, but these files are now released and the decisions made by the government can be assessed to the fullest extent. This can produce major implications regarding the relationship between what was then the Soviet Union and the United States. The public was kept in the dark about several courses of action, including the removal of American missiles and many other surprising judgment calls that may be a cause of international security between the two country’s today.
In the Early Years: 1961-1963, Kennedy administration and Vietnam take flight. Assumptions behind the administration's decisions to increase U.S involvement in Vietnam strains two very important aspects that would gainsay obligation; one, the fall of South Vietnam to Communist control and the U.S military role and support. Discussion of knowledgeable ties to Southeast Asia emerged. Lack of governmental experts created obstacles. When the Berlin crisis occurred in 1961and during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, President Kennedy was able to turn to senior people like Llewellyn Thompson, Charles Bohlen and George Keenan, who knew the Soviets intimately. There were no senior officials in the Pentagon or State Department with comparable knowledge of Southeast Asia. Ultimately, the administration failed to critically analyze their assumptions and the foundations of their decisions, which inevitable ended in disaster.
This book details the discussion of government policy in the stages of the Vietnam crisis from 1961-July 1965. It examines the main characters of President Lyndon B. Johnson, Robert McNamara, in addition to the military, which included the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It began in the Kennedy era amidst the Bay of Pigs incident and how that led to mistrust of the military planning by advisors and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It continues with Johnson and his administration making decisions over and over that continued to commit more and more involve...
Politics or politicking is a game that is more ostensible and reserved for the political arena; however, metaphorically, much of the political discourse can also be found within organizations. Politics in organizations, then, is design for groups to reconcile differences between interests, conflicts, and power (Morgan, 2006). The case study to be analyze (Cutting Back at City Hall) is one that illustrates all three aspects of interests, conflicts, and power as the City of Smithville, the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), the International Association of Firefighters (IAF), and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) deliberate the city’s proposed budget.
Modern Bureaucracy in the United States serves to administer, gather information, conduct investigations, regulate, and license. Once set up, a bureaucracy is inherently conservative. The reason the bureaucracy was initiated may not continue to exist as a need in the future. The need or reason may change with a change in the times and the culture needs. A bureaucracy tends to make decisions that protect it and further it’s own existence, possibly apart from the wishes of the populace. It may not consistently reflect what might be optimal in terms of the needs and wants of the people. Local governments employ most of the United States civil servants. The 14 cabinet departments in the U.S. are run day-to-day by career civil servants, which have a great deal of discretionary authority.
Perhaps the most critical moment that had occurred to the United States and the world of the last century is the Cuban Missile Crisis. The significance of this event was that it had brought the world to the closest it could ever be to a nuclear war. Millions of lives, cultures and infrastructure would have been lost if it was not splendidly dealt with. Yet, a man was able to prevent this devastation, and he was none other than President John Fitzgerald Kennedy (JFK) of the United States. How was he significant to the event? This research paper will discuss it with the points that are based on JFK’s characteristics. Hence, to provide an overview of this paper; the outbreak of nuclear warfare was prevented in the Cuban Missile Crisis specifically by John F. Kennedy’s many distinguished characteristics.
The Cold War began in 1946, shortly after WWII, and ended more than four decades later in 1991. It began with the shifting struggle for power and prestige between the Western hemisphere and the Soviet Union. The U.S. and President Harry Truman fear of communist attack and the Soviet Union need for a secure western border led to America’s effort in providing economic stability and security to nations of the Western hemisphere. In addition, President Truman began his “Get Tough” policy that encouraged the development of nuclear weapons for America to be securely defensive and well armed. The document, “Secretary of Commerce Henry A. Wallace Questions the “Get Tough” Policy” written by Secretary Wallace described America’s actions, “the effort to secure air base spread over half the globe from which the other half of the globe can be bombed,” which he felt America during the Cold War went “far beyond the requirements of defense.”Although, President Truman was determined to resist aggression, moreover, stop the spread of communism and Soviet power, the document was written to make the public and particularly President Truman realize that he himself used aggressive diplomacy that failed to notice the Soviet Union purpose and policy, which if he did understood, might have made better approaches in achieving his goals.
I chose individual level of analysis, primarily to focus on the thought process behind it, human decision-making in crisis, the emotion waves, and the strong powerful leaders. After A U2 spy plane secretly photographed nuclear missile being built by the Soviet Union on the Island of Cuba. American had to take charge to figure out what we would do. John F. Kennedy was in power at the time. He met with his advisors, including all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, secretly for several days because he didn’t want the Soviet Union to know that we discovered the missile. ...
The year of 1960 marked not only a turn in the decade, but a turn in culture. The american people elected the young democrat John F. Kennedy in the height of the Cold War. Tensions were rising, and ideologies clashed between the superpowers. Yet somehow, JFK never played on anti-communist fervor, at least not as much as Eisenhower. He never spent his speeches slamming Kruschev or fueling rage. Instead, he took the route of hopefulness and, until the Cuban Missile Crisis, never sponsored brinksmanship. Despite the fear and the harsh reality of nuclear weapons, he summed up his philosophy when he stated: “forgive your enemies, but never forget their names”. At the time, the radicals were no longer the bitter left nor the bitter right, but the
The Cuban Missile Crisis lasted two weeks in the midst of the Cold War, and brought the world closer to nuclear war than ever before. In October of 1962 multiple nuclear missiles of the Soviet Union’ s were discovered in Cuba, a mere 90 miles south of the United States. Given the communist ties between Cuba and the USSR, this poised a considerable threat to our national security. Throughout the 14 days the two leaders, John F. Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev struggled to clearly understand each others‘ genuine intentions. Actions taken by each state during this crisis demonstrates the realist point of view, in a variety of ways. The fundamentals of Realism will be explored and explained along with actions taken during this crisis from a realist point of view.
As, Goodnow has iterated the functions of politics communicate and addresses the state’s will however, he articulates that there is no boundaries or limitations to one or more authorities when managing politics, thus eluding to no appointed organization who handles political matters and the interest of the people. Perhaps, a contributing factor to complexities in the political and government systems and the functional roles of politics and administration. Woodrow Wilson essay “The Study of Administration,” he stresses that government systems and methods are in need of great improvement. (Woodrow. 1887) However, Wilson believes politics should be separated from administration, for administration should be a “field of business.” (Woodrow. 1887) Possibly speaking, if administration was separated would politics become more organized and an authority given to
According to Sapru R.K. (2008) p370-371 the traditional ideal of public administration which inclined to be firm and bureaucratic was based on processes instead of outcomes and on setting procedures to follow instead of focusing on results. This paradigm can be regarded as an administration under formal control of the political control, constructed on a firmly ranked model of bureaucracy, run by permanent and neutral public servants, driven only by public concern. In emerging nations the administration was true bureaucracy meaning government by officers. In this perspective Smith (1996) p235-6 perceived that“the bureaucracy controls and manages the means of production through the government. It increases chances for bureaucratic careers by the creation of public figures,demanding public managers, marketing boards.
Traditional public administration is traced back to the works of scholars like Max Weber, Woodrow Wilson and Fredrick Taylor. This form of administration was mostly influenced by Max Weber with his bureaucratic model and theory. Max Weber was a well-known sociologist born in Germany in the year 1864. He came up with his bureaucratic model as a way to try to improve management in organizations. ‘Weber emphasized on top-down control in the form of monocratic hierarchy that is a system of control in which policy is set at the top and carried out through a series of offices, whereby every manager and employee are to report to one person in top management and held accountable by that manager’ (Pfiffner, 2004, p. 1).