History 291                                                                              Richard H. Immerman
Superpower America                                                              Fall 2001

                                            
                                                                                                               

Final Examination Study Guide

Your final opportunity to dazzle me with your expertise, perspicacity, and erudition is rapidly approaching.  You must be growing anxious. You must be asking yourself, "What will Immerman ask? Why did he wait so long to provide me with the questions? What do I still need to read? What do I need to review? Where can I get some Cliff notes? Are there Cliff notes for history?"

Well, I hear you. Here they are.  Smile and look relieved.

A reminder: your essays must focus on the fundamental historical issues that inhere in the questions below provide support for  your conclusions (i.e., arguments) with robust evidence gleaned from  the  readings and lectures. Think about what response is necessary and sufficient for each question (what precisely am I asking you to think about and do), and organize your presentations and illustrations accordingly.  Strive for logic, consistency, and succinctness (avoid tangents), and anticipate counterarguments. Keep in mind that this time around you will be required to write two essays.  Other than that the examination's format will be identical to the mid-term.  I have confidence in all of you; I hope you share my outlook. Don't worry; be happy.

 

1.  An authority on U.S. history has written, "Henry Kissinger believed that, in creating a design for a world order, realism was more compassionate than romanticism. The great moralists, in his judgment, had been failures. Woodrow Wilson had proved ineffectual, and John Foster Dulles had turned foreign policy into a crusade that led straight into the Indochina quagmire. Kissinger did not make peace or justice the objective of his policy, nor was he particularly interested in 'making the world safe for democracy.' He merely wished to make the world safer and more stable." For his insightful understanding of history and astute recognition of the national interest, this authority concluded, Kissinger deserves the congratulations and gratitude of all Americans.
What advice would this authority have provided President George Dubya Bush on September 12, 2001? Would you agree with that advice? Base your reasoning on your evaluation, as an authority, of Kissinger's diagnoses and prescriptions--as well as your assessment of the conduct of foreign policy--and the outcomes of this policy--by those in Washington whose diagnoses and prescriptions have differed from Kissinger's. 

 

2.   Responding to a question at a Press Conference in 1982, Ronald Reagan provided the following history of the escalation of America's commitment to Vietnam:

"If I recall correctly, when France gave up Indochina as a colony, the leading nations of the world met in Geneva in regard to helping those colonies become independent nations. And since North and South Vietnam had been previous to colonization two separate countries, provisions were made that these two countries could by a vote of all their people together decide whether they wanted to be one country or not....

"And there wasn't anything surreptitious about it, but when Ho Chi Minh refused to participate in such an election and there was provision that the peoples of both countries could cross the border and live in the other country if they wanted to, and when they began leaving by the thousands and thousands from North Vietnam to live in South Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh closed the border and again violated that part of the agreement . . . . 

"And openly, our country sent military advisors there to help a country which had been a colony have such things as a national security force, an army you might say, or a military, to defend itself. And they were doing this, if I recall correctly, also in civilian clothes, no weapons, until they began being blown up where they lived, in walking down the street by people riding by on bicycles and throwing pipe bombs at them. and then they were permitted to carry side arms or wear uniforms . . .

"But it was totally a program until John F. Kennedy, when these attacks and forays became so great that John F. Kennedy authorized the sending in of a division of marines. That was the first move toward combat moves in Vietnam."

Please provide the former president with the correct history of the evolution of America's military intervention in Vietnam.

 

3. The history of U.S. foreign policy during the Reagan administration remains to be written. To some, he was a skilled statesman with exceptional foresight who achieved his most important aims: He prevented Communist expansion, he brought the Soviet Union to his knees, and he restored America's strength, confidence, and spirit. To others, he was an uniformed, detached ideologue, incapable of understanding global complexity. His rigidity, myopia, and  ignorance unnecessarily increased international tension even as it undermined  America's economic vitality. 

Choose your side. How would you evaluate Reagan and his foreign policy? What do you consider his legacy? Provide appropriate evidence (e.g., examples) to support your arguments.

 

4. Reflecting carefully on Raymond Garthoff's Reflections on the Cuban Missile Crisis, as well as other readings, lectures, and documents provided by this course, present an informed opinion (identify the information that informs your opinion) about the causes of the Cuban Missile (a.k.a. Caribbean) Crisis. Provide and equally informed opinion about the causes of the Crisis' resolution. Do your opinions suggest any lessons for future policy makers in terms of conflict avoidance and conflict resolution?

 

Back to Syllabus