Is Us President Joe Biden A Realist Assignment Sample

Introduction : Is Us President Joe Biden A Realist Assignment Samplepio

Get Free Samples Written by our Top-Notch Subject Expert Writers known for providing the Best Assignment Help Services in Australia

The goal of “President Joe Biden” has been to resume American foreign policy on the pre-Trump course. It has been the “presidential candidate” who most exemplified the American establishment—a balding man with fifty decades of expertise in state politics. He could, it was assumed, reinstate American efforts to dominate politics as well as weapons in order to remake the globe in the country's image. Even more, Biden made the return of American dominance in world affairs a trademark of his presidency, declaring that "America is back."

Discussion

In this context, it can understand that Joe Biden is realistic in the subsequent argument. Foreign-policy realists are undoubtedly hoping if Joe Biden enters the race, despite the concerns of many Democrats his candidacy could further splinter their already contentious party. Interventionism could regain the "White House in 2017" For such a vice president chooses to stay out of it (Shifrinson and Wertheim, 2021). The Republican contenders feel themself to be fighting a fight to demonstrate their toughness as well as boldness, as the argument therefore at "Reagan Library crystallised". Rand Paul's candidacy, its lone exception, failed in large part due to his moderate foreign policy stances (Khan and Sabah, 2021). Its GOP will undoubtedly choose a hawk as its nominee; this candidate will receive advice from those who supported the invasion of Iraq. Absent Biden, the Democrats would most likely choose a liberal idealist as their nominee. The most significant liberal advisor to "President Obama" during his first term was "Hillary Clinton", who encouraged him to go against his better judgement and increase force levels in Afghanistan (Lovely, 2022). A year earlier, "liberals in Europe and the State Department" persuaded the president to support the toppling of "Muammar Gaddafi amid" the hope of such Arab Spring. It's not an accident that both times when the constraint was broken, mistakes were made. " Vice President Biden" was against all of them.

The second argument is liberals, as well as neocons, were 2 sides of one coin, according to a realist, with differences in tactics rather than aims (BAYEZ?T, 2022). Both view the world from a moral perspective and agree that it is the duty of the "United States" to use its influence to fight the world's many evils. Neoconservatives frequently favour military actions that are unilateral, whereas liberals favour multilateral strategies that uphold international law. They consider the "United States" to be an important power that must actively participate in the current crises (Lee, 2021). Realists, like all Americans, fervently hope that democracy will spread throughout the world as well as that everyone's human rights will be protected. Most people, however, also concur with "John Quincy Adams", who is renowned for his advice to the "United States" to promote freedom as well as liberty everywhere else but refrain from travelling abroad looking for of "monsters to kill." Due to such, foreign policy is approached with restraint, thus unforced mistakes are greatly reduced. Realists are defined as having a sound awareness of both the potential of the "United States and how the world" functions. People are aware that only the most powerful nation has its limitations but that interventions frequently make matters worse (Vinjamuri, 2022). Realists maintain perspective when it comes to danger above all else. They are aware that threat depends on both competence plus intention. This threat vanishes when both are zero. ISIS could want to attack other countries, like the US, but it lacks the means for doing so. Iran may desire to "death to America," but still it lacks the means to do it. Both do not now provide a serious threat. The United States would be actually an incredibly safe nation, especially in comparison to some others in either era, despite interventionist tales to such contrary (Djedei and Salim, 2022).

In the third argument the “U.S. Department of Education” conducted a “weekend-long beta test” to guarantee a seamless procedure before launch, and now "applications for student loan forgiveness" were officially available. President Biden announced that the registration for "student loan forgiveness" is now open. "It's quick, simple as well as fast as well as it is the fresh day about "millions of Americans" all over our nation," he added (Grabowski, 2021). Vice President Biden stated that he would forgive up to $20,000 in "student loan debt for millions of Americans" (Olsson and Janssens, 2021). In fact, there under the proposed program, approximately 20 million individuals would be qualified to have all of their debt forgiven. He further maintained the moratorium on payments for federal student loans. Nevertheless, this loan forgiveness component somehow doesn't extend to federal student loan debtors, who, based on a Measure One analysis from 2021, represent a projected 8% of such nation's gross debt "student loan debt" (Smith and Dawson, 2022). If they fit this description, then might want to look into other cost-cutting measures including refinancing student loans. See what's available from private lenders. In this context, it can understand that Joe Biden is realistic in the subsequent argument. Foreign-policy realists are undoubtedly hoping if Joe Biden enters the race, despite the concerns of many Democrats his candidacy could further splinter their already contentious party. Interventionism could regain the "White House in 2017" For such a vice president chooses to stay out of it (Shifrinson and Wertheim, 2021). The Republican contenders feel themself to be fighting a fight to demonstrate their toughness as well as boldness, as the argument therefore at "Reagan Library crystallized". Rand Paul's candidacy, its lone exception, failed in large part due to his moderate foreign policy stances (Khan and Sabah, 2021). Its GOP will undoubtedly choose a hawk as its nominee; this candidate will receive advice from those who supported the invasion of Iraq. “The saddest hypothesis is that Trump wins," Biden said at Columbia University on Tuesday after delivering commencement address. “I am worried about him winning," he added. "It is a great concern."

Still, a more intelligent and realistic foreign policy could be the one taken by Joe Biden is a candidate. Senator Paul R. Tribal of Virginia explained why his 2000 presidential campaign experienced trouble: "Democrats thought we were crazy, another George Bush". Indeed, the campaign didn't fail completely because of a lack of credibility on the part of politicians like Biden; but it isn't hard to see why moderate Democrats would not want to vote for him because of his past votes in favor of interventionism. Realism is a key claim of US foreign policy. But does this mean it is a realistic approach to foreign affairs? The answer to this question hinges on how one views these ideas and how they reflect the reality of global politics today. Realism has been defined as an analytical framework that conceives of international relations as a "struggle for power" (Lewy, 1980). It is built on the foundations that states are rational actors and conflict is mainly between them. As such, realists argue that it would be better to seek peace through understanding than confrontation. It is a common assumption that Joe Biden is a realistic candidate. It can therefore understand that Joe Biden is realistic in the following argument. Interventionists are undoubtedly hoping that if Joe Biden enters the race, despite the concerns of many Democrats his candidacy could further splinter their already contentious party. Interventionism could regain the "White House in 2017" For such a vice president chooses to stay out of it (Shifrinson and Wertheim, 2021). The Republican contenders feel themself to be fighting a fight to demonstrate their toughness as well as boldness, as the argument therefore at "Reagan Library crystallized". Rand Paul's candidacy, its lone exception, failed in large part due to his moderate foreign policy stances (Khan and Sabah, 2021). Its GOP will undoubtedly choose a hawk as its nominee; this candidate will receive advice from those who supported the invasion of Iraq. Given that the foreign-policy realists are not in sight, with Biden’s announcement, the Republican nomination for president is quite likely to favour a hawk with an interventionist policy of war. Biden has criticized many times Trump’s policies, but he often embodies them himself, just as in the case of Venezuela.

Realist foreign policy is typically found in the context of a military doctrine or realistic approach that emphasizes interdependence and flexibility, as opposed to rigid political ideology. They support diplomatic engagement with other countries and diplomacy over confrontation. In some cases though, realism can imply an exclusively political approach of looking only at the external environment and the international system. While this may be appropriate for some contexts, realists are typically more interested in understanding how states behave and respond in competition as well as how different levels of international integration impact their behavior. Realists emphasize that states behave differently based on the characteristics of their domestic politics (Kallis & Kriesberg, 2001).

In 2012, Barack Obama believed that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could go on for a long time. At this point, most of Americans were tired of these wars and wanted them to end. Yet, President Obama thought it was impossible to truly withdraw from either country until such time as they were no longer fighting on American soil. In 2016, he tried to start peace negotiations in Syria but used cruise missiles against ISIS after they continued to bomb civilians. In early 2017, despite increased tensions with North Korea, he offered an olive branch which eventually led to an agreement between both countries after a year of peace talks. Realism is a political theory that emphasizes power, competition, and interdependence and flexibility. Still, a more intelligent and realistic foreign policy could be the one taken by Joe Biden is a candidate. Senator Paul R. Tribal of Virginia explained why his 2000 presidential campaign experienced trouble: "Democrats thought we were crazy, another George Bush". Indeed, the campaign didn't fail completely because of a lack of credibility on the part of politicians like Biden; but it isn't hard to see why moderate Democrats would not want to vote for him because of his past votes in favor of interventionism. Realist foreign policy is characterized by a peaceful and cooperative relationship between nations, rather than isolation or the use of force, because the international system is interdependent and states have uncontrollable influences from one another. There are many ways to define rational self-interest and the pursuit of one's own ends. Scholars have used various terms for this concept, such as "power" or "interest-seeking." All of these definitions relate to the state's behavior within an international system in which some states compete with each other for power, resources, and influence. With rational self-interest, there are no rights or wrongs; what is considered rational depends on the state's domestic politics. For example, some democracies are pacifistic and others are hawkish. The key factor is whether or not their citizens agree with that particular stance.

Conclusion

It can be concluded that the US precedent is realistic because all the policy has taken by joe Biden is very significant for the US people. Such is in argument three are explain the policy of the forgive student loan. For this policy, it can easily be observed that all the students can easily influence to further higher study and increase their rate of education level. This second policy is talk about the both view the world from a moral perspective and agree that it is the duty of the "United States" to use its influence to fight the world's many evils. Neoconservatives frequently favour military actions that are unilateral, whereas liberals favour multilateral strategies that uphold international law. That regulation is help to increase the strength of the military and protect the country.

References

Shifrinson, J., and Wertheim, S. 2021. Biden the Realist. Foreign Affairs.

Lovely, M.E., 2022, January. Us re-engagement: Is a framework that builds out China realistic?. In East Asia Forum Quarterly (Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 34-35). Canberra, ACT: ANU Press.

Khan, S.R. and Sabah, T., 2021. WAR ON TERROR, NATO WITHDRAWAL AND HUMAN RIGHT VIOLATIONS: A REALIST PARADIGM. International Journal of Policy Studies, 1(1).

BAYEZ?T, F., 2022. THE AUKUS DEAL THROUGH A NEOCLASSICAL REALIST LENS: OFFSHORE BALANCING AND ELITE PERCEPTIONS. Nev?ehir Hac? Bekta? Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, 12(2), pp.773-790.

Lee, C.M., 2021, March. Realistic roadmap: Looking beyond the north in South Korean foreign policy. In East Asia Forum Quarterly (Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 30-31).

Vinjamuri, L., 2022. Biden’s Realism US Restraint and the Future of the Transatlantic Partnership. LSE Public Policy Review, 2(3).

Djedei, A. and Salim, K., THE MULTI-DIMENSIONAL IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC ON SINO-AMERICAN RELATIONS: A NEO-REALIST PERSPECTIVE.

Grabowski, M., 2021. Joe Biden's Strategy in the Asia-Pacific Region: Change or Continuity. A Comparative Analysis. Polish Pol. Sci. YB, 50, p.95.

Olsson, D. and Janssens, L., 2021. The Green New Deal in the United States: A Realistic Blueprint for Climate Action?. L'Europe en Formation, 393(2), pp.157-173.

Smith, N.R. and Dawson, G., 2022. Mearsheimer, Realism, and the Ukraine War. Analyse & Kritik.

Abadi, A.M., 2021. Preparing for War: Assessing the US-Quad from Realist Institutionalism Perspective. Hasanuddin Journal of Social & Political Sciences, pp.41-52.

Matsumoto, N.M., 2021. Overcoming Systematic Punishments: A Neoclassical Realist Approach to the US-Turkey Relations After the S-400 Crisis. Journal of Rising Powers and Global Governance Volume, 2(1), pp.7-27.

Hammarström, R., 2021. Balans eller obalans?: Mearsheimers offensiva realism i samtidens multipolära maktordning.

Janes, J., 2021. Transatlantic Relations Under US President Joe Biden. Zeitschrift für Außen-und Sicherheitspolitik, 14(1), pp.57-73.

Touo, H., 2021. The Changing US-Africa Relations: From Offshore Balancer to Offensive Realism?. Available at SSRN 3836681.

Maxie, J., 2022. Climate Realism: The Geo-economics of Net-Zero in a Hobbesian World. Renewable Energy and Climate Action: The Future of Japan and, p.132.

Soest, C.V., 2021. The End of Apathy: The New Africa Policy under Joe Biden.

Kusumawardhana, I., 2021. Global Political Landscape In The Time Of The Covid-19 Pandemic: Realist, Liberal, And Constructivist Perspectives. Jurnal Ilmu Hubungan Internasional, 4(2).

Cladi, L., 2022. Persevering with bandwagoning, not hedging: why European security cooperation still conforms to realism. Defence Studies, 22(4), pp.624-643.

Comesaña Pérez, A., 2021. American Presidential Rhetoric: comparative discourse analysis of Donald Trump’s and Joe Biden’s inaugural addresses.

AlAlkim, H.H., 2021. US President Joe Biden’s Foreign Policy towards the Gulf. Open Journal of Political Science, 11(3), pp.378-401.

Frigerio, A., Yessenbayev, D. and Galagan, M., 2022. President Biden’s remarks about Afghanistan: the end of us liberal interventionism?. ??????? ?????. ????? ????????????? ????????? ? ????????????? ?????, 97(1), pp.14-19.

Biden, J., Yin, R.B.S. and Parmar, I., 2021. Under Biden, the Fundamentals of Sino-US Relations Will Remain the Same.

Musumeci, M.D., 2021. COVID-19 Threat Perceptions and Voting in the 2020 Presidential Election (Doctoral dissertation, University of Dayton).

Karkour, H.L., 2022. Liberal modernity and the classical realist critique of the (present) international order. International Affairs, 98(2), pp.569-586.

Is Us President Joe Biden A Realist