Henry Kissinger's book, Does America Need A Foreign Policy?

He emphasizes that his own unknown policy judgments are the best there are. Although Kissinger's final statement in this book is that "the States's ultimate challenge is to transform its fountain into moral consensus, promoting its values not by imposition merely by their willing acceptance in a humans that, for all its seeming resistance, desperately needs enlightened lead" (p. 288), there is no doubt that Kissinger believes that as the world's remaining superpower, the U.S. must maintain its dominant role in the world. His fore close lodge in is American interests abroad, but he is perceptive enough to urinate that the United States should not act without listening to and responding to concerns of different countries in international matters.

In Chapter 1, Kissinger presents an overview of the changing nature of the international environment, and how American preeminence should be handled. Kissinger states his main thesis that, "At the mop up of its power, the United States finds itself in an ironic position. In the face of perchance the most profound and wide-spread upheavals the world has ever seen, it has failed to develop concepts germane(predicate) to the emerging realities" (p. 19).

In Chapter 2, "America and Europe: The World of Democracies I," Kissinger focuses on the qualitative difference amid early relations and original relations between the U.S. and its European allies. He argues that the North Atlantic Treat Organization (NATO) has outlived its usage as

Latin American relations is the focus of Chapter 3, "The occidental Hemisphere: The World of Democracies II." After discussing the history of Latin American countries from the American perspective, Kissinger concludes with an optimistic forecast for the future of such countries as Argentina, Columbia, Brazil, Chile and Mexico. He cites free trade as the " accusatory of all nations in the region" as well as a commitment to "universal education, and equal and efficient tribunal of justice" (p. 85). Given that he admits that in Latin America "the gap between the political and the economic worlds is flagrant" (p. 84), his optimism seems approximately far-fetched.

But Kissinger places a lot of hope in the winner of NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) between the United States, Mexico and Canada great(p) credit to President Bill Clinton for his vision in this matter, although he criticizes the ex-President passim the book for his other policies and actions, and faults him for failing to include other Latin American countries in NAFTA, and even extend the conformity to Europe. Kissinger strongly believes in a global economy base on market forces. To him, the Western Hemisphere is a microcosm of the challenges the U.S. faces throughout the world.

Regarding Israel and the Middle East, Kissinger acknowledges the difficulties of negotiations and peace diplomacy with the U.S. as mediator because of the thorniness and depth of historical, religious and ideological factors that underlie the territorial disputes between Israel and Palestine. He takes the side of Israel arguing that America's position in the strife should never be impartial because Israel depends on the U.S. for its survival.

the sole fashion model for Atlantic cooperation. He gives an excellent historical and philosophical view of the alliance, the impact of the Cold War, and the change in Atlantic and European leadership. Kissinger cites the emergences of a unified Europe as "one of the most revolu
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.