The Complexity of Nixon’s Opening of China Anthony Bushong Professor Deborah Larson TA: Galen Jackson Political Science 189 HC 21st of March 2014 Introduction 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 post-World War II era. When the PRC was formally proclaimed in 1949 towards the close of the Chinese Civil War, the United States decided against recognizing its establishment and instead chose to back Taiwan, also known as the Republic of China. This decision was a product of its political environment, as President Harry Truman had just established the Truman Doctrine, which sought to check presumed Communist and Soviet aims to expand. In order to remain consistent and credible with its containment policy, a precedent was set and relations between the United States and the PRC remained closed. Tensions were only exacerbated during the Korean War in the 1950’s as the PRC intervened on behalf of the North Koreans and during the War in Vietnam in the 1970’s in their support of the North Vietnamese. Thus it is understandable that to the public eye, Nixon’s meeting with Mao Zedong in 1972 seemed to come out of the blue and was difficult to interpret given the context of Sino-US relations in the two deca... ... middle of paper ... ...threat to American interests. Prior to Kissinger’s heavy involvement in Chinese international relations, his specialty was Soviet policy and was in the midst of working on his policy known as détente, which reflects a general movement of slowly easing tensions. At first, Kissinger was hesitant when approached regarding an opening of relations of China, knowing that it would anger the Soviets and potentially disrupt his policy. Nevertheless, upon visiting his mentor, Kissinger came to the realization that “when you have two enemies, you help the lesser one.” Nevertheless, it became clear that détente and using China as a power check on the Soviets did not have to be discordant aims, as détente focused on an effort to “contain” the Soviets and thus, a visit to China fit right into the plan. This is not to say that other efforts were not already being made to
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, ...
During the 1960’s, it was all about the new revolution, creating equal rights and peace; while also being a time of horrible violence. Richard Nixon ended up facing all these problems head on as the President of the United States. Richard was a great student in school. He always had high grades in school, was constantly being elected in school elections, and excelled in school debate. After he graduated from college, he went to work at a law firm, where he met the people who would help him score a seat in the Senate, then as Vice President, and finally as President of the United States. Richard Nixon is an agent of change for achievements such as opening the doors to foreign affairs with China, his achievements in health reform, and his work in environmental protection that is still being used in todays society.
This essay will examine the three factors thematically, and in each factor, it will follow a chronology order. In the first part of the essay, it will discuss Canada’s political consideration in recognition China when taking the U.S. influence and the change of international atmosphere into account. Canada’s willingness in achieving an independent foreign policy led to its formal relations establishment with China in the early 1970s. Then it will discuss how the Chinese human rig...
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)....
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?
Starting in the late 1940s, with Cold War tensions running high and the subsequent Communist takeover of China as well as the outbreak of the Korean War, there was a growing fear in the United States of the possibility of a global conflict between the Communist bloc and the West. Thus, the US government adopted a policy of doing its best to contain Communism around the world, especially in Asia after the formation of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). When the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) invaded Tibet in 1950, the US considered it possible or even probable that the PRC would use Tibet as a launching pad to expand Communism into the rest of South and Southeast Asia, an early appearance of what was later famously called the “domino theory” during the Vietnam War. In line with our newly stated and evolving policy committing the United States to a “global containment” of Communism short of actual war, when a spontaneous Tibetan resistance movement arose in Tibet, we decided it to be in our national interest to covertly aid this movement through the training of Tibetan fighters and airdrops of arms and supplies to them. Although the US did provide direct and extensive assistance to the Tibetans for several years we eventually ended the program. I believe that if we truly had wanted to follow through on our application of the containment policy, we would have done more to aid the Tibetan resistance. Ultimately, the US looked to what it deemed to be its own self-interest in forging ahead with a plan of rapprochement with the PRC and abandoned the Tibetan resistance fighters when they most needed our help. I will elucidate how our policy regarding the resistance movement evolved from th...
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)
As two historical giants, Stalin and Mao Ze-dong must be involved at the mere mention of the Sino-Soviet relationship. The relation between the two states leaders draws the outline of the basic structure of Sino-Soviet relations. In the memory of the generation of 1950s to 1970s, there usually five portraits were hung in public, which were Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin and Mao Ze-dong, even in Tian An Men’s lobby, as the leaders of International Communist Movement and the greatest teachers of the revolution. To be honest, for the generation of 1950s to 1970s, Marx, Engels and Lenin could be ‘deity’ who were in the distance, but Stalin and Mao were alive in the same world, and they were real mentors. Both of them were the revolutionary leaders, and both had distinct characters, as same as common, both men own the merits, the weaknesses, the temper and the natural instincts. During the long-term contact between Stalin and Mao, they left many fascinating stories, and numerous profound lessons. With the same communism belief, Stalin helped Mao fight for sovereignty in China, and provided actively various kinds of weapons, such as canons, tanks, rifles and machine guns, and tried to give useful idea and constructive advice. Two such extraordinary person met, friendship developed with contradiction. They were communists, and also they were leaders of different countries. As leaders of distinct sovereignty states, Stalin and Mao usually care much about their countries’ interests. In other words, Stalin and Mao were strategic partners. After Stalin was attacked in the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), Mao talked about repeatedly that Stalin tricked China four times and forbade Ma...
On June 4th 1989, the People’s Republic of China shocked the world when Deng Xiaoping, then the “paramount leader” of the CCP-controlled state, ordered the massacre of thousands of protesters demonstrating for greater freedoms in Tiananmen Square. Deng Xiaoping and Premier of the State Council, Li Peng, defended the hardlined action by considering the protests, a threat to the political order and stability of the nation. The international response to the incident was largely condemning; the forty-sixth session of the Commission on Human Rights found the CCP’s quelling of the demonstration to be a massive violation of human rights and many nations followed suit with economically and diplomatically punishing policies. The United States, under President George H.W. Bush, sought to suspend military technology exchange contracts with the PRC and leveraged its weight at the international level to impose lending penalties through the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank. The CCP’s supposed violation of human rights had dire politico-economic consequences, resulting in the rise of Chinese defense spending from 8.6% to 15.5% and a half-billion dollar fall in tourism revenue. Through the example of the Tiananmen Square incident, one can see how the PRC’s use of its domestic security apparatus, the force behind the CCP’s internal stability measures, can challenge international human rights standards set forth by Human Rights Organizations and affect Sino-American diplomatic and economic relations accordingly. Throughout this research paper, I will speci...
Who is Henry Kissinger? Is he as Jussi Hanhamaki terms him “Dr. Kissinger” (the prince of realpolitik who put his remarkable insights to the service of a nation in deep trouble) or “Mr. Henry” (the power-hungry, bureaucratic schemer bent on self-aggrandizement)? This dichotomy is not the only one that exists when discussing Henry Kissinger. Stephen Graubard, Gregory Cleva, Walter Issacson and Jussi Hanhimäki have all written works that view Kissinger differently. Some of the differences are slight and all four sometimes agree but the best interpretation of Kissinger lies in viewing him through a lens of historical context. This view produces the image of Kissinger as realist who ultimately failed to account for the changing forces in foreign policy, ultimately this leads to his estimation as an architect of American foreign policy whose flaws kept him from realizing the paradigm he established of triangular diplomacy and détente would fail in many parts of the world.
The awakening of China, as was predicted by Napoleon centuries ago, is gradually causing ripples across the world. This is contradictive in that even after engaging the UN militarily in the 1950s conflict with Korea, it later came to be a key factor in Cold War politics, a solid member of the UN Security Council, and today, it is one of the most-evaluated nations on earth as it greatly impacts on global politics.
In order to have a better understanding about the conflict of Tiananmen and its influence on further American relations with People’s Republic of China, this paper gives a short background of the bilateral relations until 1990. Historically, the United States and China did not have good relations due to the political regime of China. In addition, China was not that developed economically to have trade or any kinds of relations with the US. According to some historical data, the first China-US negotiations at the ambassadorial level started on August 1, 1955. The bilateral relations of America and China consist of several stages. The first stage of the US-Chinese relations started in 1971 when both opened their doors to financial and economic ties. The trading volume of these countries stood at US$ 4...
people on to the side of the CCP. The CCP’s victory was also down to
...9 due to the Soviet agenda of pushing for an agreement of principles or a non-aggression pact while the PRC denies the substance of these concessions by stating nothing can be accomplished until the border dispute is solved. Meanwhile, both countries were disturbed by the other’s relationship with the United States: the Soviet Union with Nixon’s visit to Beijing in 1972 and China with the developing détente fueled by the Soviet-American Salt I accords. Additionally, the North Vietnamese victory against the democratic West in the Vietnam War, while being a great victory for the communist world, caused a further rift in Sino-Soviet relations as this historically anti-Chinese region appeased to the Soviets. The 1978 Sino-Japanese treaty and the 1979 invasion of Vietnam and Afghanistan by China and the Soviet Union respectively, opened the Sino-Soviet gap even wider.