Sunday, December 7, 2008

Final blog

Well, it's been a few months but the material I learned in this course was very resourceful. With these theories on constructivism, realism and liberalism imprinted into my mind, I have been able to conjure a clear understanding of how the individual nations operate.

While the Western nations of the world look through the eyes of constructivism due to their ability to focus upon the identification of events and how they affect foreign policy, there are some who see foreign policy in a different view. Ever since the fall of communism, Russia has focused on adopting democracy owing to their failure in the Cold War but we can't forget that Russia is deeply immersed in the styles of Machiavelli. If they lose any more power they would collapse even further, which is why for the past few months they adopt a more realist (concerned with security of territory and military strength) foreign policy. This has been the case in the two Chechnya wars, the South Ossetia war, and the standoff with the west on the proposed development of a missile defense system in Poland. The reason for their constant referral to military strength is due to past events where upon military failure, Russian citizens revolt. After the disastrous war with Japan, Russia nearly plunged into Civil war before enacting the October manifesto guaranteeing the creation of the representative body, the Duma. the events following WWI was another example that is Russia's radicalization. This is why Russia must appear war-like in the media for, if they don't, they are seen as soft by their own civilians.

In China, the liberalization of their trade with the Western nations combined with their military capabilities show themselves as a liberal and realist nation. When Taiwan showed interest of achieving independence from its large neighbor, China responded with the deployment of ballistic missiles along its shores. This was due to China's interest in maintaining control over the democratic Chinese civilians in Taiwan who resented their communist neighbor so as to appear peaceful to the West. They even offered pandas to Taiwan in exchange for eliminating their independence movement but they turned it down (much to the people's dismay as they loved those pandas). That's another example of China's liberal foreign policy, instead of fully liberalizing its communist regime into a democracy to appease its neighbors, China entices them with the cuteness of a male and female panda. So instead of appealing to their political sense, China focuses its foreign policy by use of its cutest and most popular endangered animal for enticement while showing off its military strength to its neighbors.

Finally, let's discuss foreign policy between France and Germany after the Great war. Due to their ancestral conflicts over the Alsace-Lorraine province, France wanted Germany to be unable to mount another full scale invasion by limiting its military and economy. Here, France focused on a realist sense to contain its neighbor by payment of reparations. While Germany also followed this policy as well, they tried different methods to appease its neighbor. Since millions of French soldiers were returning with shell-shock and amputated limbs, Germany offered France a new method of reparations by offering them their newest creation, aspirin. Since morphine, the standard painkiller, was addictive and painful after its effects wore off, France was enticed that the Germans were offering a non-addictive and longer lasting drug to ease their pain. Here, Germany appeases France by soothing their bodily pain from this deadly war.

These are not the only nations that posses unusual tactics in foreign policy but if we continue discussing every other nation, this blog may go on forever. When we view fooriegn policy, I tend to see it as a method to appease their neighbors through political liberalization, military fear, and pleasing their animistic instincts.

1 comment:

Rachel said...

Interesting historical tid bits Nate! I didn't know about some of that stuff.

I agree with you on much of your analysis, although I think that you underplay the importance of liberalism in the West a bit (although as you said, if you were to really go into it this blog would go on forever).