Theoretical Applications on Why Bill Term Paper

Therefore Clinton can be said to have generally followed a realist foreign policy program in Kosovo, yet due to changes in the international system which made it problematic to cut too many deals with dictators and war-criminals like Milosevich, a more conflictive approach to the issue was created. National interest, while predominant, was no longer the only consideration.

One of the problems with a constructivist understanding of the war though, is to what extent the international system allows for freedom of choice. If constructivism were true, then there were no "real" constraints on the actions of Bill Clinton during the crisis. Yet sending ground troops in for example, would have been politically infeasible, not only due to American public opinion, but because Russia might have seen that as a threat to its interests in the region and moved to act in a provocative way. The point is then, that if there are external constraints to our actions, then we are not really free to "construct" the world as we see fit, neither in our personal lives, or in the international arena. This does not mean that realism is right in its specific assumptions, but it may suggest that there are some fundamental truths to international relations that force states into particular courses of action.

In conclusion, it seems that realism provides us with a good picture of why the United States was involved in the region in general, and why it Clinton felt the need to involve the country militarily in the Kosovo conflict. Yet it does not explain the story completely, because a more pragmatic, but amoral course of action could have been pursued. Constructvism therefore, allows us to understand the situation more dynamically, and take into account changes in how states pursue their interests, and changes in the constraints they face. In the end though, if they face constraints which are not open to being changed, then there must be some "reality" underlying international relations. In the end then, it seems that realism maintains itself as the most likely explanation for this and other events in international relations.

Bibliography

Bacevich, a.J., and Eliot a. Cohen. 2001. War over Kosovo. Columbia University Press.

Morgenthau, Hans J. 1978. Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. 5th ed. New York: Alfred a. Knopf.

Sell, Louis. 2003. Slobodan Milosevic and the destruction of Yugoslavia. Duke University Press, September 1.

Wendt, Alexander. 1992. Anarchy is…