On May 27, Henry Kissinger turns 84. He is, without doubt, the most influential and controversial foreign policy maker of the last half century. He is, for better or worse, a continued presence in the White House and other leadership circles around the world. At 84, this German-Jewish immigrant is the face of international power.
Strong opinions about Kissinger -- strategic genius or war criminal? -- are easy to find. Few people, however, appreciate the complexity of his legacy. He infamously escalated American military and covert intervention in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Chile, Argentina, Angola, and countless other countries. At the same time, he brokered unprecedented schemes for multilateral cooperation and compromise with China, the Soviet Union, Israel, and Egypt. Kissinger strongly asserted American national self-interest, but he also oversaw the broadening of global interdependence through the first real nuclear arms control treaty (SALT I), the creation of a free-floating international currency regime, and the most significant human rights treaty of the Cold War --the Helsinki Accords of 1975. The abundant records of his time in office show Kissinger as a vain, vindictive, and manipulative man, as well as a brilliant, hard-working, and far-sighted thinker. He represents the best and the worst of American foreign policy.
Instead of glorifying or condemning Kissinger we would do well to study his career for the lessons and cautions it offers a new generation of foreign policy makers. His record provides few comfortable or easy answers, but it is instructive for our society today as we grapple with a failed war in Iraq, the spread of nuclear weapons, and the rise of extremist groups around the world. Here are four insights and inspirations we might draw from Kissinger's career:
1. Multilateral Leadership: Kissinger was most successful in the Middle East and with the Soviet bloc when he emphasized a leadership role for the United States, within a framework of alliances, compromises, and close coordination across diverse countries. Kissinger was least successful in Vietnam and Chile when the United States acted alone. The U.S. must lead by building constructive and diverse international coalitions, not issuing ultimatums. For all its power, the U.S. cannot act alone.
2. Force and Diplomacy: Americans tend think of force and diplomacy in dichotomous terms. Either we fight or we negotiate, many of the advisors around President Bush reasoned after September 11, 2001. Kissinger's experiences with China, the Soviet Union, and even Vietnam show that effective policy often involves BOTH fighting and negotiating at the same time. War is diplomacy by other means, and diplomacy is war by other means. You cannot have one without the other. U.S. policy in Iraq has failed because it emphasized war and excluded effective negotiations with adversaries (especially Iran) --until too late.
3. Public Consensus: Kissinger failed to build a public consensus behind his policies. He and President Richard Nixon made deception and secrecy standard operating procedures. At times his deviousness helped to produce breakthroughs, as in the dramatic 1972 opening to China. As a whole, however, Kissinger's approach bred suspicion and hostility among citizens. Ordinary listeners stopped believing what he said. Politicians as diverse as Ronald Reagan, Henry "Scoop" Jackson, and Jimmy Carter turned public distrust against Kissinger's policies. Effective foreign policy requires sustained effort to consult, educate, and inform the public. Secrecy and deception in the White House are self-defeating.
4. Lesser Evils: Much of our contemporary rhetoric about human rights, democracy, and other values is framed in absolutes. Either you are a supporter of human rights or not. Either you believe in spreading democracy to the world or you are anti-democratic. Kissinger's career complicates these simple judgments. As a refugee from Nazi hatred, Kissinger recognized that American protections for human rights and democracy had provided "salvation" for his family. He entered foreign policy circles to make sure these values were never again imperiled in the same way.
Of course the protection of these values, in Kissinger's eyes, often required some infringement upon them in the short-run. To protect American democracy, for example, Kissinger believed he had to act undemocratically to defeat communist threats. The choices were not about moral absolutes, but lesser evils --short-term democratic infringements versus existential communist threats, as Kissinger subjectively judged them. Kissinger did not always make the right decisions (he frequently didn't), but his career does show that the choices are rarely as clear-cut as many claim.
Foreign policy is a dirty business. Instead of pursuing a false moral clarity as some policy-makers and critics advocate, we need more careful weighing of lesser evils in a dangerous and complex world. We cannot democratize the planet; we must frequently find ways to work with regimes we detest without promoting them in the process.
Kissinger's record is filled with achievement and tragedy, extraordinary peacemaking and needless suffering. We should not glorify or condemn him. On his birthday we might look back on his career to provoke some serious thought about the past and future of U.S. foreign policy. Such an endeavor would serve the men and women coveting the White House in 2008 very well. It would also help Kissinger make sense of his own life as he reaches his twilight years. Happy birthday, Henry.