Conspiracies Contra Change

  

Conspiracies Contra Change

Peter Schultz

 

                  Some more passages from Ray Locker’s Nixon’s Gamble:

 

                  “Nixon’s opening to China ranks among the top foreign policy achievements of any American president. It ended the relative isolation of what in 2015 was the world’s second largest economy. It brought China onto the world stage and gave Nixon leverage against the Soviet Union and North Vietnam. Nixon fundamentally changed the paradigm of US foreign policy for the last forty years.” [122]

 

                  So, quite an achievement by Nixon. But what was the response?

 

                  “The secrecy that made the China opening possible also alienated many within his administration, particularly the Pentagon, and his political rivals. The spying by the Joint Chiefs … heated up, as Yeoman Radford continued to steal more documents for [Admiral] Moorer. The Chiefs knew Nixon had sold out Taiwan … and feared what he would do to South Vietnam…. Nixon’s relationship with Yahya Khan enabled him to use the Pakistani channel to the Chinese but … the alienation of India and the US favoritism to Pakistan created opposition inside the Pentagon that eventually turned into leaks … that weakened Nixon’s hand during the worst of the India-Pakistan crisis….” [122-123]

 

                  So, the responses to Nixon’s very significant achievement were conspiracies, both by the Pentagon and by Nixon’s political opponents. And Locker presents this as normal politics, so normal in fact that apparently even Nixon did not realize what was happening. Thus, Nixon “was forced into [yet] another coverup that would haunt him for the rest of his presidency.” Conspiracies followed Nixon’s “grand achievement,” to be followed by even more conspiracies. But “as the world watched in wonder at his grand achievement, Nixon did not realize it.” [123] He seemed blind to what was actually going on and what it was leading to.  

 

                  “Conspiracies are the normal continuation of normal politics by normal means.” And as such, they can subvert even “grand achievements,” contributing to what may be called a politics of failure. Grand achievements are not celebrated. Given the character of the political, they are conspired against.