@Deadly Doc
Reading substandard books never gets u anywhere.Thats plain obvious.
But its not too bad an idea for the examiners to reveal what exactly they want out of us.

As an example,lets look at the 2010 Current Affairs paper.There is a question that goes:"President Obama's extended hand of friendship towards China ushers in a new era of realist diplomacy in Washington.Highlight the new dimension of US foreign policy towards China."

Apparently,it seems simple enough.We all know about this new dimension.We know there is the much hyped US-China Strategic Economic Dialogue,there is the idea of G-2 thats gaining prominence,there is an increasingly assertive China thats taking global centre stage and an increasingly accomodative US that understands the gravity of Beijing's efforts to push the yuan as a rival to the dollar and that understands the implications of upsetting China which is by far the largest holder of US Treasury Bills($895billion,to be precise).

So where does all this lead??To the conclusion that the US can no longer "contain" China.Gone are the days of George Kennan's containment policy.China is just not Soviet Union.It is far different from SU in far too many ways.Whereas Moscow sought security through expansion,China takes quite another path.The Chinese seek clout through their largest foreign exchange reserves,massive investment in energy exploration from Africa to East Asia,investment in high-tech and the space race.They are impossible to "contain".....That leaves policy-makers in Washington with one option and that is "engaging" the Chinese.

Anyone familiar with International Relations jargon knows that realist diplomacy(which is predicated on realism) is about capturing power and more power.Its about overriding concern for national interest,much less about practicability.

Clearly,the US foreign policy towards China in the days to come is more a question of PRAGMATISM than REALISM.There is a thin line of difference.Technically speaking,you cannot equate the two.President Obama is widely dubbed a PRAGMATIST because he is concerned more with "what works best" and less with what "serves national interest best".So here comes the policy of CO-EVOLUTION with China,that is cooperating with China in some areas while competing with it in others.It was HEnry Kissinger who was the realist,Obama is certainly the pragmatist.

I am interested in how the examiner perceives realist diplomacy and even more interested in how he aligns the current US policy towards China with realism.

Now do u see the utility of detailed reports?