Both Gandhi and Machiavelli saw self restrain as an important quality, even though the reasons deferred. In today's political life, there is more and more evidence of the applicability of the concepts advocated by Machiavelli centuries ago. The constant use of the notion Machiavellian is relevant in this sense. It comes to define the belief that the final outcome is the most important one in the overall process of history. In the end, according to Richelieu, who was inspired by the ideas of the Italian politician, history would eventually judge a leader not for the means he used, but for the aims, he had set beforehand. (Kissinger, 1995) the so-called raison d'etat governed international relations for centuries after the Westphalia Peace in 1648 and was the practical result of the notions presented by Machiavelli.

Today, a leader must primarily think at the safety of his state, as Machiavelli rightfully considered. A common case is represented by the U.S. No matter the color of the political leadership, the general strategy advocated by both democrats and republicans targets the integrity and supremacy of the independence of the state. Therefore, the personal interest and the political battles come second to the interest of the state.

This desire and possibility to adapt to the conditions that define the national interest is visible on the international scene as well. The U.S. For instance is exercising its role as the leader of the Western World in the big lines drew by Machiavelli. Thus, the policy makers in Washington portrayed the image of the American leadership as being able to adapt to the changing conditions of international relations. Machiavelli considers that a prince, a leader is good to be seen as merciful, faithful, humane, sincere, and...

However, he adds, he also has to be able to change in the opposite direction. Thus, he concludes, it is important for the ruler not to deviate from what is good, but to be able to do evil if constrained.
The same precepts can be applied to the current international situation. The U.S., as the leader of the world, appears to be, and must be, a democratic, freedom loving country, one that values peace and diplomacy above all other means of conducting politics. However, as a true leader, it also relies on other means of imposing peace, which most of the time involve the use of force. The case of Afghanistan and Iraq are eloquent in this sense. Despite diplomatic efforts, the final solution meant the use of force as a means of applying justice. Therefore, the U.S. did made use of its leadership qualities, thus demonstrating the applicability and validity of Machiavelli's century old ideas.

Bibliography

Calvocoressi, Peter. World politics since 1945. New York: Longman, 1987.

Chew, Robin. Mahatma Gandhi: Indian Spiritual/Political, Leader, and Humanitarian. 1995. 25 April 2007. http://www.lucidcafe.com/library/95oct/mkgandhi.html#resources

Gauss, Christian. Introduction. "The Prince," Niccolo Machiavelli. 1952. Oxford University Press, Chicago.

Huntington, Samuel. The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1998.

Kissinger, Henry. Diplomacy. London: Simon & Schuster, 1995.

Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. Chicago: OUP, 1952.

Manas. Mahatma Gandhi: history and politics. 2007. 25 April 2007, from http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/southasia/History/Gandhi/gandhi2.html